Participant’s Resource Packet
MODULE 2:
CONTENT-AREA
LITERACY
Adolescent Literacy – Professional Development
Jacy Ippolito, Ed.D.
Joshua Lawrence, Ed.D.
CONTENTS
UNIT 1: CONTENT-BASED READING AND WRITING SKILLS ........................................................5
Session 1: What Does it Mean to Teach “Discipline-Specific” Literacy Skills? .............................. 6
Session 2: Thinking like a Critic, Historian, Mathematician, and Scientist .................................. 10
Session 3: Reading like a Critic, Historian, Mathematician, and Scientist................................... 20
Session 4: Writing and Presenting like a Critic, Historian, Mathematician, and Scientist .......... 32
UNIT 2: CROSS-CONTENT READING AND WRITING SKILLS AND STRATEGIES ........................... 41
Session 1: Structuring Lessons to Promote Comprehension ...................................................... 43
Session 2: The Skills that Underlie Strategic Reading.................................................................. 51
Session 3: Writing Across the Content Areas .............................................................................. 56
Session 4: Supporting Vocabulary in the Content Areas ............................................................. 60
UNIT 3: SUPPORTING STRUGGLING READERS AND WRITERS ................................................. 73
Session 1: Identifying Ways to Support Struggling Readers and Writers.................................... 75
Session 2: Considering Text Structure ......................................................................................... 81
Session 3: Text Considerations, Part 2: Multiple Texts and Multiple Purposes .......................... 85
Session 4: Using Graphic Organizers to Overcome Text Difficulty .............................................. 91
Context for Module 2
Module 2: Content-Area
Literacy
ADOLESCENT LITERACY – PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
PARTICIPANT’S RESOURCE PACKET
Context for Module 2
As noted in Module 1 of this series, reading is a complex cognitive process that
is comprised of multiple components (e.g., decoding, vocabulary, background
knowledge, comprehension, fluency, motivation, etc.). Primary-grade reading
instruction has historically focused on decoding skills, with evidence suggesting
that early decoding skills are associated with later reading abilities (Snow, Burns,
& Griffin, 1998). However, results from national and international reading
assessments (e.g., for more information on NAEP and PISA, see Module 1), in
combination with the daily experiences of many middle and high school
teachers and students (see Module 1), suggest that adolescents in the United
States need a different type of literacy instruction as they progress into 4th
grade and beyond. Reading researcher Jeanne Chall (1983) proposed distinct
stages in the development of reading skills, focusing first on phonological,
decoding, and fluency skills and second on comprehension skills and the
acquisition of new knowledge through reading. This shift in focus has come to
be known as the shift from learning to read in the earliest grades to reading to
learn in middle and high school grades (Jacobs, 2008, p. 12; also see Indrisano &
Chall, 1999). While this distinction is somewhat artificial—after all, we certainly
want students in first and second grade comprehending what they read and
learning from text—the distinction becomes clear throughout the 4th-12th
grades when many students who are able to accurately decode text continue to
struggle with understanding, synthesizing, and using the large amounts of new
information they encounter in content-area texts.
While some may consider the notion of content-area literacy to be quite new,
educators began to insist that attention be paid to how reading and writing is
embedded within content areas in the early 1900s (for a rich history of how the
concept of “content-area literacy” has emerged in the U.S., see Jacobs, 2008).
After early attempts to persuade middle and high school teachers that part of
their role included teaching literacy skills, including the oft-cited but largely
ineffective “every teacher is a teacher of reading” campaign (see Jacobs, 2008,
p. 19), great attention is now being paid to ways in which secondary teachers
can improve content-area learning by modeling general and discipline-specific
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 1
Context for Module 2
literacy skills. In response to national and international reports on adolescents’
lackluster reading and writing skills (Baer, Baldi, Ayotte, & Green, 2007; Perie,
Moran, & Lutkus, 2005), an adolescent literacy crisis was declared (Biancarosa &
Snow, 2004; Jacobs, 2008), and educators nationwide have renewed their
interest in reading and writing instruction in middle and high schools around the
country (Biancarosa & Snow, 2004; Carnegie Council on Advancing Adolescent
Literacy, 2010; Moore, Bean, Birdyshaw, & Rycik, 1999).
How does this relate to middle and high school content-area teachers? Given
the complexity of the reading process, given the shift from learning to read to
reading to learn, and given U.S. adolescents’ disappointing performance on
standardized measures of reading, it is critical that content-area teachers be
aware of and explicitly model the literacy skills necessary for higher-order
thinking in each content area. However, this is not to say that all content-area
teachers should be reading teachers. The popular motto “Every teacher is a
teacher of reading” (Jacobs, 2008, p. 19) has perhaps done more harm than
good in convincing content-area teachers of the important literacy skills
embedded in each of their respective disciplines. As Jacobs (2008) notes,
content-area teachers “understandably . . . protested that they didn’t have the
training to be reading teachers or the curricular time to ‘stop’ and teach the
‘content’ of reading in addition to that of their discipline” (p. 19).
Purpose of Module 2
This Module helps facilitators and teams of content-area teachers to agree upon
specific literacy skills that must be taught and reinforced across content areas,
as well as to decide which discipline-specific literacy skills (Moje, 2008;
Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008) should be taught primarily within each content
area. In order to help students reach the highest levels of reading and writing
proficiency, levels increasingly required in today’s complex job market (Levy &
Murnane, 2004), content-area teachers must begin to consider which literacy
skills are embedded in their content area. Secondary teachers must teach these
skills explicitly, not to improve student reading per se, but to increase students’
discipline-specific knowledge and their ability to communicate as
mathematicians, historians, scientists, etc. Ultimately, by focusing on both
general and discipline-specific literacy skills, content-area teachers will be
furthering their own content goals.
Contents of Module 2
This Module is divided into three units:
1. Content-based reading and writing skills: A unit focusing on the
discipline-specific reading and writing skills that content-area teachers
need to embed in their everyday instruction;
Page 2
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Context for Module 2
2. Cross-content reading and writing skills: A unit focusing on the literacy
skills and strategies that underlie and cut across all content areas; and
3. Supporting struggling readers and writers: A unit focusing on
differentiated instruction and supporting diverse adolescent learners in
content-area classrooms.
REFERENCES
Baer, J., Baldi, S., Ayotte, K., & Green, P. (2007). The Reading Literacy of U.S.
Fourth-Grade Students in an International Context: Results from the
2001 and 2006 Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS)
(NCES 2008–017). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of
Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.
Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next: A vision for action and
research in middle and high school literacy: A report from Carnegie
Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent
Education. Retrieved from http://www.all4ed.org/files/ReadingNext.pdf
Carnegie Council on Advancing Adolescent Literacy. (2010). Time to act: An
agenda for advancing adolescent literacy for college and career success.
New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York. Retrieved from
http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Publications/PDF/tta_Main.pdf
Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Indrisano, R., & Chall, J. (1999). Literacy development. In R. L. Mosher, D. J.
Youngman, & J. M. Day (Eds.), Human development across the life span.
Westport, CT: Praeger.
Jacobs, V. A. (2008). Adolescent literacy: Putting the crisis in context. Harvard
Educational Review, 78(1), 7-39.
Levy, F. & Murnane, R. (2004). The new division of labor: How computers are
creating the next job market. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Moje, E. B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching
and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,
52(2), 96–107.
Moore, D. W., Bean, T. W., Birdyshaw, D., & Rycik, J. A. (1999). Adolescent
literacy: A position statement for the Commission on Adolescent
Literacy of the International Reading Association. Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
Perie, M., Moran, R., & Lutkus, A.D. (2005). NAEP 2004 trends in academic
progress: Three decades of student performance in reading and
mathematics (NCES 2005–464). U.S. Department of Education, Institute
of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics.
Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 3
Context for Module 2
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to
adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational
Review, 78(1), 40-59.
Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading
difficulties in young children: Precursors and fallout. Washington, DC:
National Academy Press.
Page 4
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1 Overview
UNIT 1: CONTENT-BASED READING AND WRITING
SKILLS
Content-area teachers have every right to be skeptical of literacy tools and
strategies that are not clearly applicable to helping students learn and use
content-area concepts. With this in mind, Unit 1 has been designed to help
content-area teachers do the following:
1. Describe the ways of thinking and ways of working in each content
area that must be highlighted for students; and
2. Connect disciplinary ways of thinking and working with disciplinespecific literacy strategies.
By the end of Unit 1, content-area teachers should be able to specifically
describe the ways of thinking and working they want to encourage in their
classes, as well as connect those habits of mind and norms of practice with
reading and writing strategies tailored to their content-area goals.
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS, AT A GLANCE
The College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards (CCRAS) for Grades 6-12
describe what students should understand and be able to do in Reading, Writing,
Speaking and Listening, and Language by the time they leave high school. Each
session features a brief discussion of its relevance to Common Core Standards,
but the following chart offers a quick view of specific CCS correlations in this unit.
For specific standards language, please visit www.corestandards.org and locate
the ELA anchor standards on pp. 35, 41, 48, and 51.
UNIT 1
Session 1
Reading
1, 5, 7, 9,
10
Session 2
Session 3
Session 4
1-10
1-10
N/A
Writing
N/A
1, 2, 3, 4, 7,
8, 9, 10
N/A
1-10
Listening &
Speaking
N/A
3, 4
N/A
N/A
Language
N/A
3, 6
N/A
3, 6
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 5
Unit 1: Session 1
Session 1: What Does it Mean to Teach
“Discipline-Specific” Literacy Skills?
BEFORE THE SESSION

Read Shanahan & Shanahan. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to
adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy, pages 40-49 (for an
introduction).
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1. Text-rendering protocol:
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/protocol/doc/text_rendering.pdf
Text Rendering Experience, developed in the field by educators
Purpose
To collaboratively construct meaning, clarify, and expand our thinking about a
text or document
Roles
A facilitator to guide the process
A scribe to track the phrases and words that are shared
Set-Up
Take a few moments to review the document and mark the sentence, the
phrase, and the word(s) that you think are particularly important for our work.
Protocol
1. First Round: Each person shares a sentence from the document that
s/he thinks/feels is particularly significant.
2. Second Round: Each person shares a phrase that s/he thinks/feels is
particularly significant. The scribe records each phrase.
3. Third Round: Each person shares the word that s/he thinks/feels is
particularly significant. The scribe records each word.
4. The group discusses what they heard and what it says about the
document.
a. What new insights have you gained about the text by looking at
it in this way?
b. What do you think this text is essentially about?
Page 6
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 1
5. The group debriefs the text rendering process.
To learn more about professional learning communities and seminars for
facilitation, please visit the School Reform Initiative website at
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org
2. “Sum it Up” literacy support strategy: http://www.adlit.org/strategies/21827
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 7
Unit 1: Session 1
AFTER THE SESSION (FOR NEXT TIME…)


Read Moje, E. B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy
teaching and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 52(2), 96–107.
Skim The Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks for your discipline.
o

Peruse The Adlit.org Strategy Library: http://www.adlit.org/strategy_library
o

Consider: What are the high-level literacy skills required by your
discipline?
Consider which of these general literacy support strategies
might be most applicable in your particular content areas.
Be prepared to share your thoughts and favorite strategies in the next
session.
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
CCRAS for Reading, Grades 6-12: 1, 5, 7, 9, 10
The CCRAS for reading state the need for students to demonstrate “the capacity
to surmount the challenges posed by complex texts.” As content-area texts
grow increasingly complex to support the depth of knowledge they contain, it is
essential to equip students with the tools and strategies they need to unlock the
meaning in those texts. This is particularly essential when strategies are
particularized to one discipline or genre. Cross-content reading strategies,
however, are no less significant. The CCRAS for reading expect that students in
middle and high school can handle independently and proficiently a wide variety
of texts, both literary and informational. They must analyze the structure of
these texts and how the parts relate to one another; integrate and evaluate
information delivered in diverse formats, including visually and quantitatively;
synthesize related information presented in different texts; and read closely in
order to make logical inferences from text. These are not skills that are
demonstrated only in an English class; rather, these skills are required for
students to be successful readers in every content area.
Page 8
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 1
REFERENCES
Jacobs, V. A. (2008). Adolescent literacy: Putting the crisis in context. Harvard
Educational Review, 78(1), 7-39.
Moje, E. B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching
and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,
52(2), 96–107.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to
adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational
Review, 78(1), 40-59.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Online Resources:




Adlit.org Strategy Library
Cross-Disciplinary Proficiencies (American Diploma Project)
Doing What Works, Department of Education – Adolescent Literacy
Focus
Video Introduction to the Adolescent Literacy Crisis
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 9
Unit 1: Session 2
Session 2: Thinking like a Critic, Historian,
Mathematician, and Scientist
BEFORE THE SESSION

Read Moje, E. B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy
teaching and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 52(2), 96–107.

Skim The Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks for your discipline.

What are the high-level literacy skills required by your discipline?

Peruse The Adlit.org Strategy Library: http://www.adlit.org/strategy_library


Which of these general literacy support strategies might be most applicable
in your particular content areas?
Be prepared to share your thoughts and favorite strategies.
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1. Final Word Discussion Protocol:
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/protocol/doc/final_word.pdf
The Final Word, Adapted from the original by Jennifer Fischer-Mueller and Gene
Thompson-Grove.
Purpose
The purpose of this discussion format is to give each person in the group an
opportunity to have their ideas, understandings, and perspective enhanced by
hearing from others. With this format, the group can explore an article, clarify
their thinking, and have their assumptions and beliefs questioned in order to
gain a deeper understanding of the issue.
Time
For each round, allow about 8 minutes (circles of 5 participants: presenter 3
minutes, response 1 minute for 4 people, final word for presenter 1 minute).
Page 10
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 2
Total time is about a 40 minutes for a group of 5 (32 minutes for a group of 4, 48
minutes for a group of 6).
Roles
Facilitator/timekeeper (who also participates); participants
Facilitation
Have participants identify one “most” significant idea from the text (underlined
or highlighted ahead of time), stick to the time limits, avoid dialogue, have equal
sized circles so all small groups finish at approximately the same time.
Protocol
1. Sit in a circle, and identify a facilitator/time-keeper.
2. Each person needs to have one “most” significant idea from the text
underlined or highlighted in the article. It is often helpful to identify a
“back up” quote as well.
3. The first person begins by reading what “struck him or her the most”
from the article. Have this person refer to where the quote is in the text
— one thought or quote only. Then, in less than 3 minutes, this person
describes why that quote struck him or her. For example, why does s/he
agree/disagree with the quote, what questions does s/he have about
that quote, what issues does it raise for him or her, what does s/he now
wonder about in relation to that quote?
4. Continuing around the circle each person responds to that quote and
what the presenter said, briefly, in less than a minute. The purpose of
the response is:
a. to expand on the presenter’s thinking about the quote and the
issues raised for him or her by the quote,
b. to provide a different look at the quote,
c. to clarify the presenter’s thinking about the quote, and/or
d. to question the presenter’s assumptions about the quote and
the issues raised (although at this time there is no response
from the presenter).
5. After going around the circle with each person having responded for
less than one minute, the person that began has the “final word.” In no
more than one minute the presenter responds to what has been said.
Now what is s/he thinking? What is his or her reaction to what s/he has
heard?
6. The next person in the circle then begins by sharing what struck him or
her most from the text. Proceed around the circle, responding to this
next presenter’s quote in the same way as the first presenter’s. This
process continues until each person has had a round with his or her
quote.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 11
Unit 1: Session 2
7. End by debriefing the process in your small group.
To learn more about professional learning communities and seminars for
facilitation, please visit the School Reform Initiative website at
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org
2. Links to Standards Documents:






The Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks
The Common Core Standards for Math and English Language Arts
National Council of Teachers of English/International Reading
Association Standards
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
National Council for the Social Studies: Curriculum Standards for Social
Studies
National Science Teachers Association (NSTA): Education Standards
3. Chalk Talk Discussion Protocol:
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/protocol/doc/chalk_talk.pdf
Chalk Talk, Developed by Hilton Smith, Foxfire Fund; adapted by Marylyn
Wentworth.
Chalk Talk is a silent way to reflect, generate ideas, check on learning, develop
projects or solve problems. It can be used productively with any group—
students, faculty, workshop participants, committees. Because it is done
completely in silence, it gives groups a change of pace and encourages
thoughtful contemplation. It can be an unforgettable experience. Middle level
students absolutely love it—it’s the quietest they’ll ever be!
Format
Time: Varies according to need; can be from 5 minutes to an hour.
Materials: Chalk board and chalk or paper roll on the wall and markers.
Process
1. The facilitator explains VERY BRIEFLY that chalk talk is a silent activity.
No one may talk at all and anyone may add to the chalk talk with words
or graphics as they please. You can comment on other people’s ideas
simply by drawing a connecting line to the comment. It can also be very
effective to say nothing at all except to put finger to lips in a gesture of
silence and simply begin with #2.
2. The facilitator writes a relevant question in a circle on the board.
Sample questions:

Page 12
What did you learn today?
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 2







So What? or Now What?
What do you think about social responsibility and schooling?
How can we involve the community in the school, and the school in
the community?
How can we keep the noise level down in this room?
What do you want to tell the scheduling committee?
What do you know about Croatia?
How are decimals used in the world?
3. The facilitator either hands a piece of chalk to everyone, or places many
pieces of chalk at the board and hands several pieces to people at
random.
4. People write as they feel moved. There are likely to be long silences —
that is natural, so allow plenty of wait time before deciding it is over.
5. How the facilitator chooses to interact with the Chalk Talk influences its
outcome. The facilitator can stand back and let it unfold or expand
thinking by:




Circling other interesting ideas, thereby inviting comments to
broaden
Writing questions about a participant comment
Adding his/her own reflections or ideas
Connecting two interesting ideas/comments together with a line
and adding a question mark
Actively interacting invites participants to do the same kinds of
expansions. A Chalk Talk can be an uncomplicated silent reflection or a
spirited, but silent, exchange of ideas. It has been known to solve vexing
problems, surprise everyone with how much is collectively known about
something, get an entire project planned, or give a committee
everything it needs to know without any verbal sparring.
6. When it’s done, it’s done.
7. The Chalk Talk can be considered complete at this point or it can
become the basis for a further discussion. Questions to raise with the
group might include:



What do you notice about what we wrote?
What do you wonder about now?
What was the Chalk Talk like for you?
To learn more about professional learning communities and seminars for
facilitation, please visit the School Reform Initiative website at
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 13
Unit 1: Session 2
4. “Habits of Mind” 3-Column Organizer
Habits of
Mind
Page 14
Reading Like a…
Norms of Practice
(Writing/Presenting)
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 2
AFTER THE SESSION (FOR NEXT TIME…)
Questions to Consider:
 Given the fundamental habits of mind, or ways of thinking, in your
discipline…


How are you currently (and explicitly) teaching those habits of
mind?
How can we make those habits of mind explicit in our reading &
writing tasks?
For next time:


Read Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The
challenges of adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of
New York.
Skim One or two of the following articles that best matches your content
area/interests:

Math



Adams, T. L. (2003). Reading mathematics: More than words can
say. The Reading Teacher, 56(8), 786–795.
Barton, M. L., Heidema, C., & Jordan, D. (2002). Teaching reading
in mathematics and science. Educational Leadership, 60(3),24-28.
Kenney, J. M., Hancewicz, E., Heuer, L., Metsisto, D., & Tuttle, C.
L. (2005). Chapter 2: Reading in the mathematics classroom. In
Literacy strategies for improving mathematics instruction.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.


ELA


Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Chapter 4: Tools for Active
Literacy: The Nuts & Bolts of Comprehension Instruction. In
Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension for understanding
and engagement. New York: Stenhouse.
Langer, J. A. (2000). Guidelines for Teaching Middle and High
School Students to Read and Write Well. Albany, NY: Center on
English Learning & Achievement, Albany State University of New
York.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 15
Unit 1: Session 2


Science




Neufeld, P. (2005). Comprehension Instruction in Content Area
Classes. The Reading Teacher, 59(4), 302–312.
Barton, M. L., Heidema, C., & Jordan, D. (2002). Teaching reading
in mathematics and science. Educational Leadership, 60(3),24-28.
Just Read Now! (n.d.). Skills and strategies that work. Just Read
Florida! Retrieved from
http://www.justreadnow.com/content/science/skills.htm
Teaching Today. (2005). Improving reading skills in the science
classroom. Adlit.org and Glencoe/McGraw Hill.
Social Studies


Massey, D. D., & Heafner, T. L. (2004). Promoting Reading
Comprehension in Social Studies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 48(1), 26–40.
Ogle, D., Klemp, R., & McBride, B. (2007). Building literacy in
social studies: Strategies for improving comprehension and
critical thinking. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
 Chapter 1 Online: Reading Social Studies Texts
 Chapter 6 Online: Strategies for Textbook Literacy


Bring A sample content-area text you are currently using with your
students.
Fill-in The 2nd column on the “Habits of Mind” 3-Column Organizer

What does it mean to read like a critic, historian, mathematician, or
scientist?

Be as specific as you can about the reading habits in your content
area!
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
CCRAS for Reading, Grades 6-12: 1-10
CCRAS for Writing, Grades 6-12: 1-4, 7-10
Page 16
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 2
CCRAS for Speaking and Listening, Grades 6-12: 3, 4
CCRAS for Language, Grades 6-12: 3, 6
During the conception of the Common Core Standards, it was decided that
disciplinary literacy deserved independent recognition out of respect for the
particular texts and habits of mind that define each content area. As such, the
Common Core Standards for English Language Arts include a section titled
“Standards for Literacy in History, Social Studies, Science, & Technical Subjects”
(see pp. 59-66 at ELA Core Standards). Interestingly, the anchor standards for
reading and writing in the content areas remain the same as those in ELA, but
the grade-based breakdowns of each standard elaborate upon what these
standards look like across content areas. For instance, they make reference to
primary and secondary source documents, analyzing discipline-specific
vocabulary and text genre, and evaluating reason and evidence. This breakdown
echoes the message we present in these Modules—that core reading and
writing skills are demonstrated in every discipline, but the product will differ
according to each discipline’s habits of mind and norms of practice.
Furthermore, students who internalize the habits of mind of each discipline will
be better equipped to evaluate a speaker’s point of view and present
information in an appropriate format, including making accurate language
choices. All of this considered, it is essential for teachers of adolescents to think
beyond the generic skills of summary and fact recall and to ensure that students
are delving deeply into the skills and practices of each content area that require
them to think like an expert in that field.
REFERENCES
Adams, T. L. (2003). Reading mathematics: More than words can say. The
Reading Teacher, 56(8), 786–795.
Barton, M. L., Heidema, C., & Jordan, D. (2002). Teaching reading in
mathematics and science. Educational Leadership, 60(3),24-28.
Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Chapter 4: Tools for Active Literacy: The Nuts &
Bolts of Comprehension Instruction. In Strategies that work: Teaching
comprehension for understanding and engagement. New York:
Stenhouse.
Just Read Now! (n.d.). Skills and strategies that work. Just Read Florida!
Retrieved from
http://www.justreadnow.com/content/science/skills.htm
Kenney, J. M., Hancewicz, E., Heuer, L., Metsisto, D., & Tuttle, C. L. (2005).
Chapter 2: Reading in the mathematics classroom. In Literacy strategies
for improving mathematics instruction. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 17
Unit 1: Session 2
Langer, J. A. (2000). Guidelines for teaching middle and high school students to
read and write well: Six features of effective instruction. Albany, NY:
Center on English Learning & Achievement, Albany State University of
New York.
Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The challenges of
adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
Massey, D. D., & Heafner, T. L. (2004). Promoting Reading Comprehension in
Social Studies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(1), 26–40.
Moje, E. B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching
and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,
52(2), 96–107.
Neufeld, P. (2005). Comprehension Instruction in Content Area Classes. The
Reading Teacher, 59(4), 302–312.
Ogle, D., Klemp, R., & McBride, B. (2007). Building literacy in social studies:
Strategies for improving comprehension and critical thinking.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Teaching Today. (2005). Improving reading skills in the science classroom.
Adlit.org and Glencoe/McGraw Hill.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Adler, C. R. (2004). Seven strategies to teach students text comprehension.
Retrieved from http://www.adlit.org/article/3479
Fang, Z. (2008). Going beyond the fab five: Helping students cope with the
unique linguistic challenges of expository reading in intermediate
grades. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(6), 476–487.
Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2009). Teaching content knowledge and reading
strategies in tandem. Retrieved from
http://www.adlit.org/article/34644.
Moje, E., Overby, M., Tysvaer, N., & Morris, K. (2008). The complex world of
adolescent literacy: Myths, motivations, and mysteries. Harvard
Educational Review, 78(1), 107-154.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to
adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational
Review, 78(1), 40-59.
Online Resources:
 Center on English Learning and Achievement Reports on
Disciplinary Thinking
Page 18
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 2
 Moje, E. B. (2008). Disciplinary Literacy Podcast. International
Reading Association.

Voice of Literacy Podcasts: Comprehension instruction: Focus on
content or strategies? with Dr. Margaret McKeown:
http://www.voiceofliteracy.org/posts/34422
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 19
Unit 1: Session 3
Session 3: Reading like a Critic, Historian,
Mathematician, and Scientist
BEFORE THE SESSION

Read Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The
challenges of adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of
New York.

Skim One or two relevant content-area reading articles.

Bring The 3-Column Organizer, with the 2nd column completed.

Bring A sample content-area text you are currently using with your
students.
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1. Access to this online article: Kyoto and Beyond: Kyoto Protocol FAQs
2. Circle of Viewpoints Thinking Routine:
http://pzweb.harvard.edu/vt/VisibleThinking_html_files/03_ThinkingRoutines/0
3e_FairnessRoutines/Fairness_pdfs/VT_CircleofViewpoints.pdf
Circle of Viewpoints Routine, A routine for exploring diverse perspectives.
A slightly modified version of the Circle of Viewpoints discussion protocol:




I am reading “The Kyoto Protocol” from the point of view of a
mathematician, scientist, historian, or literary critic.
I think... describe the topic from your viewpoint. Be an actor — take on
the character of your viewpoint.
I paid particular attention to… how did you read the article? What did
you focus on specifically?
A question I have from this viewpoint is... ask a question from this
viewpoint.
WRAP UP: What new ideas do you have about the topic that you didn’t have
before? What new questions do you have?
Page 20
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 3
3. Content-Area Reading 3-Column Organizer
Discipline-Specific
Suggestions for
Strategic Reading
What Might I Do With
My Text?
I Still Wonder…
Page 21
Unit 1: Session 3
AFTER THE SESSION (FOR NEXT TIME…)

Read One of the following articles, according to content area:






Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum: English
Language Arts
Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum:
Mathematics
Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum: Science
Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum: Social
Studies
Bring One or two samples of student writing (from your content area class)
to the next session.
Bring The “Habits of Mind” 3-Column Organizer.
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
CCRAS for Reading, Grades 6-12: 1-10
As stated in the previous session, it was decided during the conception of the
Common Core Standards that disciplinary literacy deserved independent
recognition out of respect for the particular texts and habits of mind that define
each content area. As such, the Common Core Standards for English Language
Arts include a section titled “Standards for Literacy in History, Social Studies,
Science, & Technical Subjects” (see pp. 59-66 at ELA Core Standards). The
breakdown of these standards by grade reflect the discipline-specific reading
practices that take place in content-area classes, such as evaluating various
explanations of a historical event in order to determine where texts leave
matters uncertain, determining how words and phrases are used in particular
contexts to advance to advance an author’s agenda, analyzing various points of
view and assessing claims and evidence, challenging hypotheses, using
disciplinary language to paraphrase key points, and synthesizing information
from a wide range of sources. Notice that these reading skills are all reflected in
the larger ELA anchor standards, but the particular habits of mind of each
discipline dictate more specifically what it looks like to execute those skills in
each content-area class. Furthermore, these standards were carefully designed
to redouble students’ interaction with scientific and technical texts that make
use of diagrams and data to convey important and complex concepts, because
“the vast majority of reading in college and workforce training programs will be
sophisticated nonfiction.”
Page 22
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 3
REFERENCES
ACT. (2009). 2009 ACT National and State Scores. Retrieved from
http://www.act.org/news/data/09/index.html
Adams, T. L. (2003). Reading mathematics: More than words can say. The
Reading Teacher, 56(8), 786–795.
Barton, M. L., Heidema, C., & Jordan, D. (2002). Teaching reading in
mathematics and science. Educational Leadership, 60(3),24-28.
CBC News. (2007). Kyoto and beyond: Kyoto protocol FAQs. Retrieved from
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/kyoto/
Conley, M. (2008). Cognitive strategy instruction for adolescents: What we know
about the promise, what we don’t know about the potential. Harvard
Educational Review, 78(1), 84-106.
Fang, Z., & Schleppegrell, M.J. (2010). Disciplinary literacies across content
areas: Supporting secondary reading through functional language
analysis. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(7), 587–597.
Gorlewski, J. (2009). Research for the classroom: Shouldn’t they already know
how to read? Comprehension strategies in high school English. Urbana,
IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Chapter 4: Tools for Active Literacy: The Nuts &
Bolts of Comprehension Instruction. In Strategies that work: Teaching
comprehension for understanding and engagement (2nd ed.). New York:
Stenhouse.
Just Read Now! (n.d.). Skills and strategies that work. Just Read Florida!
Retrieved from http://www.justreadnow.com/content/science/skills.htm
Kenney, J. M., Hancewicz, E., Heuer, L., Metsisto, D., & Tuttle, C. L. (2005).
Chapter 2: Reading in the mathematics classroom. In Literacy strategies
for improving mathematics instruction. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Langer, J. A. (2000). Guidelines for teaching middle and high school students to
read and write well: Six features of effective instruction. Albany, NY:
Center on English Learning & Achievement, Albany State University of
New York.
Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The challenges of
adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
Massey, D. D., & Heafner, T. L. (2004). Promoting Reading Comprehension in
Social Studies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(1), 26–40.
Neufeld, P. (2005). Comprehension Instruction in Content Area Classes. The
Reading Teacher, 59(4), 302–312.
Ogle, D., Klemp, R., & McBride, B. (2007). Building literacy in social studies:
Strategies for improving comprehension and critical thinking.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 23
Unit 1: Session 3
Ostlund, K. (1998). What the research says about science process skills.
Electronic Journal of Science Education. Retrieved from
http://wolfweb.unr.edu/homepage/jcannon/ejse/ostlund.html
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Cross-Content Resources
ACT. (2009). 2009 ACT National and State Scores. Retrieved from
http://www.act.org/news/data/09/index.html
Alfassi, M. (2004). Reading to learn: Effects of combined strategy instruction on
high school students. Journal of Educational Research, 97, 171–184.
Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussionbased approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction
and student performance in middle and high school English. American
Educational Research Journal, 40, 685–730.
Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next: A vision for action and
research in middle and high school literacy: A report from Carnegie
Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent
Education. Retrieved from http://www.all4ed.org/files/ReadingNext.pdf
Buehl, D. (2009). Classroom strategies for interactive learning (3rd ed.). Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.
Christenbury, L., Bomer, R., & Smagorinsky, P. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of
adolescent literacy research. New York: Guilford Press.
Fisher, D. B., Brozo, W. G., Frey, N., & Ivey G. (2006). 50 content area strategies
for adolescent literacy. New York: Prentice Hall.
Heller, R., & Greenleaf, C. (2007). Literacy instruction in the content areas:
Getting to the core of middle and high school improvement.
Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved from
http://www.all4ed.org/files/LitCon.pdf
Hinchman, K. A., & Sheridan-Thomas, H. K. (Eds.). (2008). Best practices in
adolescent literacy instruction. New York: Guilford Press.
Irvin, J. L., Buehl, D., & Klemp, R. (2007). Reading and the high school student:
Strategies to enhance literacy (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Irvin, J. L., Meltzer, J., & Dukes, M. (2007). Taking action on adolescent literacy:
An implementation guide for school leaders. Alexandria, VA: Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Irvin, J. L., Meltzer, J., Mickler, M. J., Phillips, M., & Dean, N. (2009). Meeting the
challenge of adolescent literacy: Practical ideas for literacy leaders.
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Ivey, G., & Fisher, D. (2006). Creating literacy-rich schools for adolescents.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Page 24
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 3
Langer, J. A. with Close, E., Angelis, J., and Preller, P. (2000). Guidelines for
teaching middle and high school students to read and write well: Six
features of effective instruction. Albany, NY: National Research Center
on English Learning and Achievement. Retrieved from
http://www.adlit.org/article/19907 or
http://cela.albany.edu/publication/brochure/guidelines.pdf
Lewis, J. (Ed.). (2009). Essential questions in adolescent literacy: Teachers and
Researchers describe what works in classrooms. New York: Guilford
Press.
McEwan, E. K. (2007). Teach the seven strategies of highly effective readers.
Adlit.org. Retrieved from http://www.adlit.org/article/19844
Marzano, R. J. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based
strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Meltzer, J. (with Smith, N., & Clark, H). (2002). Adolescent literacy resources:
Linking research and practice. Providence, RI: Northeast and Islands
Regional Educational Laboratory at Brown University. Retrieved from
http://www.alliance.brown.edu/pubs/adlit/alr_lrp.pdf
Moore, D. W., Alvermann, D. E., & Hinchman, K. A. (2000). Struggling adolescent
readers: A collection of teaching strategies. Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.
Moore, D. W., & Hinchman, K. A. (2006). Teaching adolescents who struggle
with reading: practical strategies (2nd ed.). New York: Allyn and Bacon.
National Council of Teachers of English. (2007). 21st century literacies: A policy
research brief produced by the National Council of Teachers of English.
Retrieved from http://www.adlit.org/article/20832
Neufeld, P. (2005). Comprehension Instruction in Content Area Classes. The
Reading Teacher, 59(4), 302–312.
Olson, C. B., & Land, R. (2007). A cognitive strategies approach to reading and
writing instruction for English language learners. Research in the
Teaching of English, 41(3), 269-303. Retrieved 2007, from
http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/download/nwp_file/8538/Booth_Olson,_Carol,
_et_al.pdf?x-r=pcfile_d
Parris, S. R., Fisher, D., & Headley, K. (2009). Adolescent literacy, field tested:
Effective solutions for every classroom. Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.
Schoenbach, R., Greenleaf, C., Cziko, C., & Hurwitz, L. (1999). Reading for
understanding: A guide to improving reading in middle and high school
classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sturtevant, E. G., Boyd, F. B., Brozo, W. G., Hinchman, K. A., Moore, D. W., &
Alvermann, D. E. (2006). Principled practices for adolescent literacy: A
framework for instruction and policy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Vacca, R. T., & Vacca, J. L. (2010). Content area reading: Literacy and learning
across the curriculum (10th ed.). New York: Addison-Wesley.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 25
Unit 1: Session 3
Wilhelm, J. D. (2008). “You gotta BE the book”: Teaching engaged and reflective
reading with adolescents (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Wilhelm, J. D., Baker, T. N., & Dube, J. (2001). Strategic reading: Guiding
students to lifelong literacy 6-12. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cross-Content Online Resources:









The Access Center: Enhancing access for students with disabilities
Adlit.org Classroom Strategies
Doing What Works, Department of Education, Adolescent Literacy/
Comprehension Instruction
The Council of Chief State School Officers Adolescent Literacy Toolkit
(2007)
Just Read Florida! Reading as a Strategic Activity
Project Zero’s Visible Thinking / Thinking Routines
Sources of reading research from Adlit.org
Strategies for Differentiating Instruction
Word Wise & Content Rich (Doug Fisher & Nancy Frey) Video Examples
of Content-area Reading and Writing Instruction
Math Resources
Adams, T. L. (2003). Reading mathematics: More than words can say. The
Reading Teacher, 56(8), 786–795.
Barton, M. L., & Heidema, C. (2002). Teaching reading in mathematics: A
Supplement to Teaching Reading in the Content Areas: If Not Me, Then
Who? (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Draper, R., & Siebert, D. (2009). Content area literacy in mathematics and
science classrooms. In S.R. Parris, D. Fisher, & K. Headley
(Eds.), Adolescent Literacy, Field Tested (pp. 105-116). Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final
report of the national mathematics advisory panel. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Education. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/reports.html
Krick-Morales, B. (2006). Reading and understanding written math problems.
¡Colorín Colorado! Retrieved from
http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/13281
Miller, P., & Koesling, D. (2009). Mathematics teaching for understanding:
Reasoning, reading, and formative assessment. In S. Plaut (Ed.), The
Right to Literacy in Secondary Schools (pp. 65-80). New York; Denver,
Page 26
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 3
CO; Newark, DE: Teachers College Press; Public Education & Business
Coalition; International Reading Association.
Pierce, M. E., & Fontaine, L. (2009). Designing vocabulary instruction in
mathematics. The Reading Teacher, 63(3), 239–243.
Robertson, K. (2009). Math instruction for English language learners. ¡Colorín
Colorado! Retrieved from
http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/30570
Torres-Velasquez, D., & Rodriguez, D. (2005). Improving mathematics problem
solving skills for English language learners with learning disabilities.
Retrieved from http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/12907
Vierling-Claasen, A. (2005). Reading mathematics. Retrieved from
http://bsc.harvard.edu/PDF's/reading_math.pdf
Math Online Resources:















American Diploma Project’s Achieve K-12 Benchmarks for Mathematics
Annenberg “Learning Math” Online Courses for Middle School Math
Teachers
Annenberg “Teaching Math” Online Courses for Middle & High School
Math Teachers
¡Colorín Colorado!, Math Research and Reports about ELLs
¡Colorín Colorado!, Math Resources for ELLs and students with learning
differences
Common Core Standards for Mathematics
The Council of Chief State School Officers: Adolescent Literacy/
Mathematics Lesson Plans
Direct Instruction in Middle School Mathematics for Students with
Learning Disabilities
Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks
Math Problem Solving for Middle School Students with Learning
Disabilities
Mathematics Strategy Instruction (SI) for Middle School Students with
Learning Disabilities
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM): Standards
NCTM: Middle School Resources
NCTM: High School Resources
Problem zero: Getting students to read mathematics
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 27
Unit 1: Session 3
Science Resources
Dillon, D. R., O'Brien, D. G., Moje, E. B., & Stewart, R. A. (1994). Literacy learning
in science classrooms: A cross-case analysis of three qualitative
studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 345-362.
Draper, R., & Siebert, D. (2009). Content area literacy in mathematics and
science classrooms. In S.R. Parris, D. Fisher, & K. Headley
(Eds.), Adolescent Literacy, Field Tested (pp. 105-116). Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
Fisher, D., Ross, D., & Grant, M. (2010). Building background knowledge:
Improving student achievement through wide reading. The Science
Teacher, 77(1), 23-26.
Grant, M. C., & Fisher, D. (2010). Reading and writing in science: Tools to
develop disciplinary literacy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Moje, E. B. (1995). Talking about science: An interpretation of the effects of
teacher talk in a high school classroom. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 32, 349-371.
Moje, E. B., Peek-Brown, D., Sutherland, L.M., Marx, R.W., Blumenfeld, P., &
Krajcik, J. (2004). Explaining explanations: Developing scientific literacy
in middle-school project-based science reforms. In D. Strickland & D.E.
Alvermann (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Improving literacy learning for
preadolescent and adolescent learners in grades 4–12 (pp. 227–251).
New York: Carnegie Corporation.
Moje, E. B., Tucker-Raymond,E., Varelas, M., & Pappas, C. (2007). Giving oneself
over to science: Exploring the roles of subjectivities and identities in
learning science. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1(3), 593-601.
Radcliffe, R., Caverly, D., Hand, J., & Franke, D. (2008, February). Improving
reading in a middle school science classroom. Journal of Adolescent &
Adult Literacy, 51(5), 398–408.
Saul, E. W. (Ed.). (2004). Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction:
Perspectives on theory and practice. Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.
Scott, J. (1993). Science and language links: Classroom implications. Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.
Shin, F., Rueda, R., Simpkins, C., & Lim, H. (2009). Developing language and
literacy in science: Differentiated and integrated instruction for ELLs. In
J. Coppola, & E.V. Primas (Eds.), One Classroom, Many Learners (pp.
140-160). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Teaching Today. (2005). Improving reading skills in the science classroom.
Adlit.org. Retrieved from http://www.adlit.org/articles/21454
Wilson, A. (2008, October). Moving beyond the page in content area literacy:
Comprehension instruction for multimodal texts in science. The Reading
Teacher, 62(2), 153–156.
Page 28
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 3
Zywica, J., & Gomez, K. (2008). Annotating to support learning in the content
areas: Teaching and learning science. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 52(2), 155–165.
Science Online Resources:














¡Colorín Colorado!, Science Research and Reports about ELLs
The Council of Chief State School Officers: Adolescent Literacy/Science
Lesson Plans
Differentiated Instruction for Science
How Stuff Works
Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks
Middle School Science/Literacy Lessons from Just Read Now!
National Science Teachers Association (NSTA): Education Standards
NSTA: Middle School Resources
NSTA: High School Resources
NASA Educational Resources
National Geographic Educational Resources, Lesson Plans, and site for
younger students)
Reading Scientifically: Applying Process Skills to Reading and Science
Special Issue of “Science” (2010, April): “Science, Language, and
Literacy”
Teachers’ Domain: Reading and Writing in Science Activities
Social Studies Resources
Bain, R. (2006). Rounding up unusual suspects: Facing the authority hidden in
history textbooks and teachers. Teachers College Record, 108(10),
2080–2114.
Massey, D. D., & Heafner, T. L. (2004). Promoting Reading Comprehension in
Social Studies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(1), 26–40.
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. Hinchman & H. Sheridan-Thomas (Eds.), Best practices in
adolescent literacy instruction (pp. 185–211). New York: Guilford.
Ogle, D., Klemp, R., & McBride, B. (2007). Building literacy in social studies:
Strategies for improving comprehension and critical thinking.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Schell, E., & Fisher, D. (2006). Teaching social studies: A literacy-based approach.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 52(2), 96–107.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 29
Unit 1: Session 3
Villano, T. L. (2005). Should social studies textbooks become history? A look at
alternative methods to activate schema in the intermediate
classroom. The Reading Teacher, 59(2), 122–130.
Wineburg, S.S., & Martin, D. (2004). Reading and rewriting history. Educational
Leadership, 62(1), 42–45.
Social Studies Online Resources:






¡Colorín Colorado!, Social Studies Research and Reports about ELLs
The Council of Chief State School Officers: Adolescent Literacy/Social
Studies Lesson Plans
Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks
National Council for the Social Studies: Curriculum Standards for Social
Studies
Teachers’ Domain: Reading and Writing in Social Studies Activities
Teachers’ Domain: 10 Media- and Strategy-rich Lessons on Teaching
American History
English Language Arts (ELA) Resources
Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understanding about writing, reading, and
learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Bomer, R. (1995). Time for meaning: Crafting literate lives in middle & high
school. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Carroll, P., De Luise, R., & Howard, T. (2009). Best literacy practices for
secondary English language arts classrooms. In S.R. Parris, D. Fisher, & K.
Headley (Eds.), Adolescent Literacy, Field Tested (pp. 94-104). Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.
Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2006). Teaching for comprehending and fluency:
Thinking, talking, and writing about reading, K-8. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension
for understanding and engagement (2nd ed.). New York: Stenhouse.
Keene, E. O., & Zimmerman, S. (2007). Mosaic of thought: The power of
comprehension strategy instruction (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Langer, J. A. with Close, E., Angelis, J., and Preller, P. (2000). Guidelines for
teaching middle and high school students to read and write well: Six
features of effective instruction. Albany, NY: National Research Center
on English Learning and Achievement. Retrieved from
http://www.adlit.org/article/19907 or
http://cela.albany.edu/publication/brochure/guidelines.pdf
Page 30
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 3
Lattimer, H. (2003). Thinking through genre: Units of study in reading and
writing workshops grades 4-12. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
ELA Online Resources:







American Diploma Project’s Achieve 4-12 Benchmarks for English and
Communication
College- and Career-Readiness Standards: Core Standards for English
Language Arts
The Council of Chief State School Officers: Adolescent Literacy/ELA
Lesson Plans
International Reading Association Standards and Position Statements
Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks
Model Units for High School English Language Arts
National Council of Teachers of English Standards and Resources
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 31
Unit 1: Session 4
Session 4: Writing and Presenting like a Critic,
Historian, Mathematician, and Scientist
BEFORE THE SESSION

Read One of the following articles, according to content area:






Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum:
English Language Arts
Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum:
Mathematics
Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum:
Science
Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum:
Social Studies
Bring One or two samples of student writing (from your content area class)
to the session.
Bring The “Habits of Mind” 3-Column Organizer.
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1. List-Group-Label and Jigsaw Organizers from Adlit.org:


Page 32
List-Group-Label/Downloadable Word File/PDF
Jigsaw Organizer/Downloadable Word File/PDF
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
From Our Classroom Strategy Library
List-Group-Label
Unit 1: Session 4
Name
Topic
In the first column, list all of the words you can think of that are related to the topic. Once you
have created your list, group the words based on their similarities. Label each group when you
are finished.
List
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Group and Label
Page 33
From Our Classroom Strategy Library
Unit 1: Session 4
Jigsaw Activity
Name
Topic
As you read and discuss with your group, write down important facts about your topic. After
you have become an expert on your own topic, you will share your findings with a group of
classmates, and learn about their topics as well.
Important Ideas
1.
2.
3.
Summary
Other Facts
Page 34
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 4
AFTER THE SESSION
Questions for participants to consider when the group reconvenes include:




What happened with your students’ writing?
How was their thinking revealed?
What obstacles did they encounter?
What would you do differently next time?
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
CCRAS for Writing: 1-10
CCRAS for Language: 3, 6
In this Module, we emphasize that writing is an invaluable tool for content-area
teachers to use as a vehicle for transmitting concepts and ideas in their subject
areas. When students adopt the habits of mind for a particular discipline, they
learn not only the subject matter on the surface level, but more importantly, the
ways of thinking based on different information sources and ways of expressing
themselves based on different audiences. According to the Common Core
Standards for ELA and Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical
Subjects, “to be college and career ready writers, students must take task,
purpose, and audience into careful consideration, choosing words, information,
structures, and formats deliberately.” Students must know the stylistic and
language differences between arguing the impact of a historical event and
arguing the results of an experiment. They must choose their words and
organization carefully to persuade sophisticated and knowledgeable audiences.
Furthermore, students’ writing must mature to the point where they can
comfortably and purposefully integrate writing styles. The Common Core
Standards expect that college and career-ready students can use narrative to
advance an analysis of historical events or individuals as well as to describe the
steps in a procedure that others could replicate to reach the same results.
Beyond that, these writers must craft these arguments through the citation of
reliable sources while avoiding an overreliance on any one of those sources.
Students who undergo the process of manipulating their writing style and
language in order to convey their thinking are simultaneously writing to learn
and writing to demonstrate their learning. By taking the time to teach disciplinespecific writing strategies, teachers of adolescents can advance their contentlearning goals and then some.
REFERENCES
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 35
Unit 1: Session 4
Graham, S., & Hebert, M. A. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing
can improve reading. A Carnegie Corporation Time to Act Report.
Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved from
http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Publications/WritingToRead_01.pdf
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. Retrieved from http://www.all4ed.org/files/WritingNext.pdf
Michigan Department of Education. (n.d.). Writing across the curriculum:
English language arts. Retrieved from
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/ELA_WAC_263481_7.pdf
Michigan Department of Education. (n.d.). Writing across the curriculum:
Mathematics. Retrieved from
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/Writing_to_Learn_Mathem
atics_306722_7.pdf
Michigan Department of Education. (n.d.). Writing across the curriculum:
Science. Retrieved from
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/Science_WAC_2_3_264454
_7.pdf
Michigan Department of Education. (n.d.). Writing across the curriculum: Social
studies. Retrieved from
http://michigan.gov/documents/mde/SSWAC_225020_7.pdf
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Cross-Content Resources
Access Center. (2008). Teaching writing to diverse student populations.
Retrieved from
http://www.k8accesscenter.org/writing/knowledgebank.asp
Applebee, A. N., & Langer, J. A. (2006). The state of writing instruction in
America's schools: What existing data tell us. New York: Center on
English Learning & Achievement, University at Albany. Retrieved from
http://www.albany.edu/aire/news/State%20of%20Writing%20Instructi
on.pdf
Beaufort, A. (2006). Writing in the professions. In P. Smagorinsky (Ed.), Research
on composition: Multiple perspectives on two decades of change (pp.
217–242). New York: Teachers College Press.
Coker, D., & Lewis, W. E. (2008). Beyond writing next: A discussion of writing
research and instructional uncertainty. Harvard Educational Review,
78(1), 231-250.
De La Paz, S., & Graham, S. (2002). Explicitly teaching strategies, skills, and
knowledge: Writing instruction in middle school classrooms. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 94(4), 687–698.
Page 36
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 4
Portalupi, J., & Fletcher, R. (2001). Nonfiction craft lessons: Teaching
information writing K-8. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Gersten, R., Baker, S., & Edwards, L. (1999a). Teaching writing to students with
LD. Adlit.org. Retrieved from http://www.adlit.org/article/215
Gersten, R., Baker, S., & Edwards, L. (1999b). Teaching expressive writing to
students with learning disabilities. ERIC/OSEP Digest. ERIC
Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education, Council for
Exceptional Children.
McMackin, M. C., & Siegel, B. S. (2002). Knowing how: Researching and writing
nonfiction 3-8. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Monroe, B. W., & Troia, G. A. (2006). Teaching writing skills to middle school
students with disabilities. Journal of Educational Research, 100(1), 21–
33.
Panofsky, C., Pacheco, M., Smith, S., Santos, J., Fogelman, C., Harrington, M., et
al. (2005). Approaches to writing instruction for adolescent English
language learners: A discussion of recent research and practice
literature in relation to nationwide standards. Providence, RI: The
Education Alliance at Brown University. Retrieved from
http://www.alliance.brown.edu/pubs/writ_instrct/apprchwrtng.pdf
Rothstein, A., Rothstein, E., & Lauber, G. (2007). Writing as learning: A contentbased approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Smagorinsky, P. (Ed.) (2006). Research on composition: Multiple perspectives on
two decades of change. New York: Teachers College Press.
Yancey, K. B. (2009). Writing in the 21st century. Urbana, IL: NCTE. Retrieved
from http://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Press/Yancey_final.pdf
Cross-Content Online Resources:












Achieve Inc.’s End-of-High School Writing and Communication
Standards
Adlit.org Writing Resources
¡Colorín Colorado! Writing with diverse learners (particularly ELLs)
Computer-Assisted Instruction and Writing
Differentiated Instruction for Writing
Every Child a Reader and Writer (inside writing workshop – videos)
Interactive 6 Traits Writing Process (Overview and Rubrics)
National Council of Teachers of English: National Gallery of Writing
The National Writing Project/Resources by Topic
ReadWriteThink.org
The Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) Journal, by Plymouth State
University
Writing Across the Curriculum PPT Slideshow, Introducing Michigan’s
Resources
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 37
Unit 1: Session 4
Math Resources
Urquhart, V. (2009). Using writing in mathematics to deepen student learning.
Denver, CO: McREL.
Verlaan, W. (2010). Making writing count: Writing as a means of improving
mathematics learning. In J. Cassidy, S. D. Garrett, & M. Sailors (Eds.),
Literacy coaching: Research & practice: 2009 CEDER yearbook (pp. 179198). Corpus Christi, TX: Center for Educational Development,
Evaluation, and Research; Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi College
of Education.
Math Online Resources:






American Diploma Project’s Achieve K-12 Benchmarks for Mathematics
Bernadette, R. (n.d.). Writing to learn mathematics. (great
examples/samples from students)
Lee, K. P. (n.d.). A guide to writing in mathematics. (great handouts for
students)
Mathwire.com: Writing in Mathematics
Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum:
Mathematics
Urquhart, V. (2009). Using Writing in Mathematics Book Preview.
Science Resources
Campbell, B., & Fulton, L. (2003). Science notebooks: Writing about inquiry.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Kolikant, Y. B., Gatchell, D. W., Hirsch, P. L., & Linsenmeier, R. A. (2006). A
cognitive-apprenticeship-inspired instructional approach for teaching
scientific reading and writing. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(3),
20-25.
Saul, E. W. (Ed.). (2004). Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction:
Perspectives on theory and practice. Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.
Science Online Resources:



Page 38
Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum:
Science
RAFT Writing
Science Daily
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 1: Session 4



Science Inquiry: The Link to Accessing the General Education Curriculum
Science News for Kids
The Why Files website — “The Science Behind the News”
Social Studies Resources
Ogle, D., Klemp, R., & McBride, B. (2007). Building literacy in social studies:
Strategies for improving comprehension and critical thinking.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Scheidel, Kari E. (2007). Using genre in the social studies classroom. In C.
Clingman & A. Tendero (Eds.), Writing intention: Prompting professional
learning through student work (pp. 41–44). Grand Rapids, MI: Michigan
Reading Association. Retrieved from
http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/download/nwp_file/10526/genre_social
_studies.pdf?x-r=pcfile_d
Social Studies Online Resources:

Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum:
Social Studies

National Council for the Social Studies

Teaching with Documents, by Peter Pappas

Teaching Writing in History Class, by Jane Hancock of the UCLA Writing
Project

The Texas Faculty Collaboratives College and Career Readiness
Initiative: Writing Like a Historian & Comprehending History Texts
English Language Arts Resources
Angelillo, J. (2005). Making revision matter. New York: Scholastic Inc.
Atwell, N. (2002). Lessons that change writers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Bomer, R. (1995). Time for meaning: Crafting literate lives in middle & high
school. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Calkins, L. (1994). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Calkins, L. (2003). Units of study for teaching writing: Grades 3-5. Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.
Fletcher, R., & Portalupi, J. (2007). Craft lessons: Teaching writing K-8 (2nd Ed.).
Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Graves, D. H. (1994). A fresh look at writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 39
Unit 1: Session 4
Hilocks, G., Jr. (2007). Narrative writing: Learning a new model for teaching.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Lattimer, H. (2003). Thinking through genre: Units of study in reading and
writing workshops 4-12. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
ELA Online Resources:



Every Child a Reader and Writer (inside writing workshop – videos)
Genre Study: Identifying Teaching Points Across Genres
Purdue Online Writing Lab Resources









Page 40
Academic Writing
Grammar
Understanding Common Writing Assignments
Writing Mechanics
The Writing Process
Interactive 6 Traits Writing Process (Overview and Rubrics)
Michigan Department of Education: Writing Across the Curriculum:
English Language Arts
The National Writing Project / Resources by Topic
ReadWriteThink.org
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2 Overview
UNIT 2: CROSS-CONTENT READING AND WRITING
SKILLS AND STRATEGIES
The purpose of this unit is to help teachers in each of the content areas begin to
consider which reading/writing skills – and related literacy support strategies –
are shared across disciplines. The broad goals of the unit are to introduce
literacy skills and instructional support strategies that could be considered
“intermediate” according to Shanahan & Shanahan (2008) and to help teachers
begin to build consensus regarding which skills/strategies are most important
(given particular student, teacher, and school contexts) to teach explicitly in all
disciplines. Moreover, by the end of the unit, teachers should be able to:
1. Craft a lesson plan that supports both content learning and literacy
development;
2. Identify the common cognitive skills that underlie strategic reading
(e.g., inferencing, summarizing, questioning, etc.) and use
instructional strategies to model those skills;
3. Use both “writing to learn” and “writing to demonstrate
knowledge” strategies to support reading and writing in contentarea classrooms; and
4. Identify vocabulary challenges students might encounter and
explicitly model strategies for vocabulary learning and use.
As a result, this unit should move teachers toward consensus about the need to
explicitly teach strategic reading practices, as well as toward an individual
understanding of how disciplinary purposes might require specific tailoring of
strategies/instruction.
REFERENCES
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to
adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational
Review, 78(1), 40-59.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 41
Unit 2 Overview
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS, AT A GLANCE
The College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards (CCRAS) for Grades 6-12
describe what students should understand and be able to do in Reading, Writing,
Speaking and Listening, and Language by the time they leave high school. Each
session features a brief discussion of its relevance to Common Core Standards,
but the following chart offers a quick view of specific CCS correlations in this unit.
For specific standards language, please visit www.corestandards.org and locate
the ELA anchor standards on pp. 35, 41, 48, and 51.
Page 42
UNIT 1
Session 1
Session 2
Session 3
Session 4
Reading
2, 4, 6, 8
1-10
N/A
N/A
Writing
1, 2, 4, 8, 9
N/A
1-10
N/A
Listening &
Speaking
2, 3
N/A
N/A
N/A
Language
N/A
N/A
N/A
3, 4, 5, 6
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 1
Session 1: Structuring Lessons to Promote
Comprehension
BEFORE THE SESSION



Read Jacobs. (2002). Reading, writing, and understanding. Educational
Leadership, 60(3), 58-61.
Read Perkins & Blythe. (1994). Putting understanding up front. Alexandria,
VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Bring A sample content-area text you are currently using with your students
(e.g., textbook chapter, poem, magazine article, word problem, primary
source, etc.).
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1. Microlab Discussion Protocol:
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/protocol/doc/microlabs.pdf
Microlabs, Developed by Julian Weissglass for the National Coalition for Equity
in Education based at the University of California, Santa Barbara; adapted in the
field by educators.
Purpose
To address a specific sequence of questions in a structured format with small
groups, using active listening skills.
Time
About 8 minutes per question — this works best with a series of no more than
three questions.
Group Format
Form triads — either with the people you’re sitting near, or find others in the
group you don’t know well. Number off within your triad — 1, 2, 3.
Facilitation Tips
“I’ll direct what we will talk about. Each person will have one minute (or,
sometimes, two minutes, depending on the group and the question) to talk
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 43
Unit 2: Session 1
about a question when it’s their turn. While the person is speaking, the other
two in the group simply listen. When the time is up, the next person speaks, and
so on. I’ll tell you when to switch.” Emphasize that talk has to stop when you call
time, and conversely, that if the person is done speaking before time is up, the
three people should sit in silence, using the time to reflect.
The quality of the questions matters in this exercise. The questions should be
ones that are important to the group, and that spiral in depth from first to last.
It’s nice to have a chime to ring to indicate that time is up.
The Activity
After instructing the group, read the first question aloud (twice). Give everyone
time to think or write in preparation. Then, tell people when to begin, and then
tell them when each one/two minute segment is up. On the first question, begin
with person #1, then #2, then #3. Then read the next question aloud. On the
second question, begin with #2, then #3, then #1. On the third question, begin
with #3, then #1, then #2.
Reflection Questions Following the Activity





What did you hear that was significant? What key ideas or insights were
shared?
How did this go for you? What worked well, and what was difficult?
Why?
How might your conversations have been different had we not used this
protocol?
What are the advantages/disadvantages of using this activity? When
would you use this protocol?
What would you want to keep in mind as someone facilitating this
activity?
To learn more about professional learning communities and seminars for
facilitation, please visit the School Reform Initiative website at
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org
2. Final Word Discussion Protocol:
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/protocol/doc/final_word.pdf
Final Word, Adapted from the original by Jennifer Fischer-Mueller and Gene
Thompson-Grove.
Purpose
The purpose of this discussion format is to give each person in the group an
opportunity to have their ideas, understandings, and perspective enhanced by
hearing from others. With this format, the group can explore an article, clarify
Page 44
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 1
their thinking, and have their assumptions and beliefs questioned in order to
gain a deeper understanding of the issue.
Time
For each round, allow about 8 minutes (circles of 5 participants: presenter 3
minutes, response 1 minute for 4 people, final word for presenter 1 minute).
Total time is about a 40 minutes for a group of 5 (32 minutes for a group of 4, 48
minutes for a group of 6).
Roles
Facilitator/timekeeper (who also participates); participants
Facilitation
Have participants identify one “most” significant idea from the text (underlined
or highlighted ahead of time), stick to the time limits, avoid dialogue, have equal
sized circles so all small groups finish at approximately the same time.
Protocol
1. Sit in a circle, and identify a facilitator/time-keeper.
2. Each person needs to have one “most” significant idea from the text
underlined or highlighted in the article. It is often helpful to identify a
“back up” quote as well.
3. The first person begins by reading what “struck him or her the most”
from the article. Have this person refer to where the quote is in the text
— one thought or quote only. Then, in less than 3 minutes, this person
describes why that quote struck him or her. For example, why does s/he
agree/disagree with the quote, what questions does s/he have about
that quote, what issues does it raise for him or her, what does s/he now
wonder about in relation to that quote?
4. Continuing around the circle each person responds to that quote and
what the presenter said, briefly, in less than a minute. The purpose of
the response is:




To expand on the presenter’s thinking about the quote and the
issues raised for him or her by the quote;
To provide a different look at the quote;
To clarify the presenter’s thinking about the quote; and/or
To question the presenter’s assumptions about the quote and the
issues raised (although at this time there is no response from the
presenter).
5. After going around the circle with each person having responded for
less than one minute, the person that began has the “final word.” In no
more than one minute the presenter responds to what has been said.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 45
Unit 2: Session 1
Now what is s/he thinking? What is his or her reaction to what s/he has
heard?
6. The next person in the circle then begins by sharing what struck him or
her most from the text. Proceed around the circle, responding to this
next presenter’s quote in the same way as the first presenter’s. This
process continues until each person has had a round with his or her
quote.
7. End by debriefing the process in your small group.
To learn more about professional learning communities and seminars for
facilitation, please visit the School Reform Initiative website at
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org
3. Link to Adlit.org’s Strategy Library
Page 46
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 1
4. Lesson Plan Template
Content Goals/Standards:
Literacy Goals/Standards:
Text(s)/Materials Required:
Pre-Reading/Learning Activity (including strategy):
During-Reading/Learning Activity (including strategy):
Post-Reading/Learning Activity (including strategy):
Extensions?
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 47
Unit 2: Session 1
AFTER THE SESSION (FOR NEXT TIME…)
Things to remember — Teaching for understanding and focusing on
comprehension are keys to improving mastery of content-area concepts and
skills. A pre-/guided-/post- lesson plan structure can help promote students’
understanding of challenging content-area texts and concepts.
For next time:




Take the lessons that have been planned during this session and try them in
your classrooms.
Reflect on the experience, considering the following questions: What
happened? What worked well? What challenges did I encounter? Which
Adlit.org strategies seemed most fruitful for activating background
knowledge, guiding reading/learning, and helping solidify learning in my
content area?
Be prepared to report back on your findings in the next session, and bring a
copy of the lesson(s) you piloted.
Read Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Chapters 1 and 2. Strategies that
work: Teaching comprehension for understanding and engagement (2nd
Ed.). Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
CCRAS for Reading, Grades 6-12: 2, 4, 6, 8
CCRAS for Writing, Grades 6-12: 1, 2, 4, 8, 9
CCRAS for Speaking and Listening, Grades 6-12: 2, 3
This session highlights the difference between teaching for “knowing” and
teaching for understanding. When students know information, they can
remember it in one-dimensional contexts and they often forget it soon after
they are tested on it. When students understand a concept, they can think
about it from various perspectives and in different contexts, and they can
synthesize it with related concepts to create a greater depth of understanding.
These are the types of reading, writing, and critical listening skills expected of
college- and career-ready students. Beyond understanding the plot events in a
novel, students must analyze the development of themes; they must interpret
an author’s language in a primary source and decipher figurative and
connotative language; they must delineate and evaluate an argument based on
the validity of reasoning and the evidence used to support it; all of which
Page 48
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 1
involve a great deal of background knowledge and guided practice. They must
then demonstrate this understanding in their writing by mirroring the practices
of good writers: building and substantiating an argument and choosing precise
language. Students cannot hope to accomplish these tasks without targeted
instruction in cognitive strategies specific to each content area, including the
proper balance of pre-reading, guided reading, and post-reading activities.
REFERENCES
Conley, M. (2008). Cognitive strategy instruction for adolescents: What we know
about the promise, what we don’t know about the potential. Harvard
Educational Review, 78(1), 84-106.
Guzzetti, B. (2009). Thinking like a forensic scientist: Learning with academic and
everyday texts. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(3), 192-203.
Jacobs, V. A. (2002). Reading, writing, and understanding. Educational
Leadership, 60(3), 58–61.
Jacobs, V. A. (n.d.). Reading and writing for understanding. Usable Knowledge at
the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved from
http://www.uknow.gse.harvard.edu/teaching/TC1-1.html
Perkins, D., & Blythe, T. (1994). Putting understanding up front. Educational
Leadership, 51(5), 4-7.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2001). Guiding readers and writers: Teaching
comprehension, genre, and content literacy. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd Ed.).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Online Resources:

Council of Chief State School Officers: Adolescent Literacy Toolkit and
Lesson Plans
Videos Clips:

Doing What Works, Department of Education: How to Organize Your
Teaching
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 49
Unit 2: Session 1




Page 50
Abstract-Concrete Connections
Examples With Practice
Higher-Order Questions
Spacing Learning Over Time
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 2
Session 2: The Skills that Underlie Strategic
Reading
BEFORE THE SESSION


Read Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Chapters 1 and 2. Strategies that
work: Teaching comprehension for understanding and engagement (2nd
Ed.). Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Be ready to share Findings about a lesson planned during the previous
session that was piloted in your classroom. If possible, bring a copy of the
lesson(s) you piloted.
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1. 4As Discussion Protocol:
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/protocol/doc/4_a_text.pdf
4 “A” Text Protocol, Adapted from Judith Gray, Seattle, WA 2005.
Purpose
To explore a text deeply in light of one’s own values and intentions.
Roles
Facilitator/timekeeper (who also participates); participants.
Time
Five minutes total for each participant, plus ten minutes for the final two steps.
1. The group reads the text silently, highlighting it and writing notes in the
margin on post-it notes in answer to the following four questions (you
can also add your own “A”s).




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 (or Act upon)?
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 51
Unit 2: Session 2
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 “A”s, taking them
one at a time – what do people want to argue with, agree with, and
aspire to (or act upon) in the text? Try to move seamlessly 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.
2. Link to Adlit.org’s Strategy Library
AFTER THE SESSION
Things to remember — there are fundamental skills (ways of thinking, or
cognitive processes) involved in reading and learning that, when explicitly
reviewed, may lead to improved comprehension. Individual literacy support
strategies can be taught, but only if matched wisely to general or specific
disciplinary instructional purposes.
For next time, participants should:


Page 52
Read summary of 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. Retrieved from http://www.adlit.org/article/27336
Skim Access Center. (2008). Teaching writing to diverse student
populations. Retrieved from
http://www.k8accesscenter.org/writing/knowledgebank.asp
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 2
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
CCRAS for Reading, Grades 6-12: 1-10
To be a college- and career-ready reader, a student must be able to play an
active role in reading; this means determining, analyzing, interpreting, assessing,
integrating, delineating, and evaluating. Consider the nuances that each content
area brings to these skills. What steps does a reader take to analyze
interpersonal relationships vs. experimental data? How might a purpose for
reading interfere with the way in which a reader interprets word choices and
information in the text? This session aims to emphasize that these larger skills
are demonstrated in reading across the content areas, but that teachers can use
what they know about the habits of mind and norms of practice in their
disciplines to particularize the strategies needed to arrive at these sophisticated
skills. For instance, activating background knowledge in English class might
mean showing a topical film, while in math class, it might be facing an authentic
challenge or dilemma. Such is also the case for questioning, making inferences,
visualizing, determining importance, and summarizing and synthesizing.
Although these strategies can be manipulated to suit each content area, they all
play an important role in teaching comprehension – or more importantly,
guiding students to take an active role in achieving comprehension.
REFERENCES
Cofer, J. O. (1996). An island like you: Stories from the barrio. Madison, WI:
Demco Media Inc.
Conley, M. (2008). Cognitive strategy instruction for adolescents: What we know
about the promise, what we don’t know about the potential. Harvard
Educational Review, 78(1), 84-106.
Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Chapters 1 and 2. Strategies that work:
Teaching comprehension for understanding and engagement (2nd Ed.).
Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to
adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational
Review, 78(1), 40-59.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Adler, C. R. (2004). Seven strategies to teach students text comprehension.
Retrieved from http://www.adlit.org/article/3479
Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2007). Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension
for understanding and engagement (2nd Ed.). Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 53
Unit 2: Session 2
Heller, R., & Greenleaf, C. (2007). Literacy instruction in the content areas:
Getting to the core of middle and high school improvement.
Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Jacobs, V. A. (2002). Reading, writing, and understanding. Educational
Leadership, 60(3), 58–61.
Jacobs, V. A. (n.d.). Reading and writing for understanding. Usable Knowledge at
the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved from
http://www.uknow.gse.harvard.edu/teaching/TC1-1.html
Keene, E. O., & Zimmermann, S. (2007). Mosaic of thought: The power of
comprehension strategy instruction. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Lapp, D., Fisher, D., & Grant, M. (2008). “You can read this text—I'll show you
how”: Interactive comprehension instruction. Journal of Adolescent &
Adult Literacy, 51(5), 372–383.
Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The challenges of
adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
(also see Adlit.org for abbreviated version:
http://www.adlit.org/article/34644)
McEwan, E. K. (2007). 40 ways to support readers in content classrooms, grades
6-12. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Pardo, L. S. (2004). What every teacher needs to know about comprehension.
The Reading Teacher, 58(3), 272-280.
Perkins, D., & Blythe, T. (1994). Putting understanding up front. Educational
Leadership, 51(5), 4-7.
Ross, D., & Frey, N. (2009). Learners need purposeful and systematic
instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(1), 75–78.
Tovani, C. (2000). I read it, but I don’t get it: Comprehension strategies for
adolescent readers. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Tovani, C. (2004). Do I really have to teach reading? Content comprehension,
grades 6-12. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Online Resources:

Adlit.org — http://www.adlit.org
Voice of Literacy Podcasts: Effective middle and high school reading
programs with Dr. Robert Slavin:
http://www.voiceofliteracy.org/posts/27155

Page 54
For an excellent audio overview of Schema Theory, and Piaget’s stages
of development, listen to the first part of “Great Ideas in Psychology:
Jean Piaget on Development,” a freely available podcast found on
iTunes U, provided by Missouri State University.
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 2
Video Clips:

Doing What Works, Department of Education


Adolescent Literacy: Comprehension Strategies
Learners Need Purposeful and Systematic Instruction (accompanies
Ross & Frey [2009] article):

http://www.reading.org/General/Publications/Journals/JAAL/Sup
plementalContent/jaal_JAAL-53-1-Ross_supp-1.aspx
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 55
Unit 2: Session 3
Session 3: Writing Across the Content Areas
BEFORE THE SESSION


Read summary of 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. Retrieved from http://www.adlit.org/article/27336
Skim Access Center. (2008). Teaching writing to diverse student
populations. Retrieved from
http://www.k8accesscenter.org/writing/knowledgebank.asp
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1. Microlab Discussion Protocol:
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/protocol/doc/microlabs.pdf
Microlabs, Developed by Julian Weissglass for the National Coalition for Equity
in Education based at the University of California, Santa Barbara; adapted in the
field by educators.
Purpose
To address a specific sequence of questions in a structured format with small
groups, using active listening skills.
Time
About 8 minutes per question — this works best with a series of no more than
three questions.
Group Format
Form triads — either with the people you’re sitting near, or find others in the
group you don’t know well. Number off within your triad — 1, 2, 3.
Facilitation Tips
“I’ll direct what we will talk about. Each person will have one minute (or,
sometimes, two minutes, depending on the group and the question) to talk
about a question when it’s their turn. While the person is speaking, the other
two in the group simply listen. When the time is up, the next person speaks, and
so on. I’ll tell you when to switch.” Emphasize that talk has to stop when you call
Page 56
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 3
time, and conversely, that if the person is done speaking before time is up, the
three people should sit in silence, using the time to reflect.
The quality of the questions matters in this exercise. The questions should be
ones that are important to the group, and that spiral in depth from first to last.
It’s nice to have a chime to ring to indicate that time is up.
The Activity
After instructing the group, read the first question aloud (twice). Give everyone
time to think or write in preparation. Then, tell people when to begin, and then
tell them when each one/two minute segment is up. On the first question, begin
with person #1, then #2, then #3. Then read the next question aloud. On the
second question, begin with #2, then #3, then #1. On the third question, begin
with #3, then #1, then #2.
Reflection Questions Following the Activity





What did you hear that was significant? What key ideas or insights were
shared?
How did this go for you? What worked well, and what was difficult?
Why?
How might your conversations have been different had we not used this
protocol?
What are the advantages/disadvantages of using this activity? When
would you use this protocol?
What would you want to keep in mind as someone facilitating this
activity?
To learn more about professional learning communities and seminars for
facilitation, please visit the School Reform Initiative website at
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org
2. Links to sample lesson plans: CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit website
While there are multiple lessons to choose from, we recommend the following
for analysis and discussion. What elements are strong? What elements could be
improved? How is “writing” used in the lesson plan associated with your
discipline?



ELA – Short Stories (Quick Write) / Essays (Coding)
Math – Geometry (Triple-entry journal / Quick Write)
Science – Biology (Triple-entry journal)
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 57
Unit 2: Session 3

Social Studies – World Cultures Lesson (RAFT)
3. “I Used to Think” Discussion Protocol:
http://pzweb.harvard.edu/vt/VisibleThinking_html_files/03_ThinkingRoutines/0
3c_Core_routines/Core_pdfs/VT_Usedtothink.pdf
I Used to Think..., But Now I think... from Project Zero’s Visible Thinking
Repository of Routines
A routine for reflecting on how and why our thinking has changed.
Directions:
Considering insights from this session on writing across the content areas,
please write a response using each of the following sentence stems:


I used to think….
But now, I think…
AFTER THE SESSION (FOR NEXT TIME…)
For next time:



Read Bromley, K. (2007). Nine things every teacher should know about
words and vocabulary instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,
50(7), 528–537.
Read Flanigan, K., & Greenwood, S.C. (2007). Effective content vocabulary
instruction in the middle: Matching students, purposes, words, and
strategies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(3), 226–238.
Bring A sample content-area text you are currently using with your
students.
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
CCRAS for Writing: 1-10
Although “process writing” is a phrase normally associated with English
language arts classes, it deserves quality instructional time across the content
areas. The College and Career Readiness Standards for writing in history/social
studies, science, and technical subjects describe final products as having precise,
Page 58
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 3
knowledgeable claims, logical organization, purposeful vocabulary and syntax,
well-established tone, and a supportive and thought-provoking conclusion. Each
of these skills by themselves requires explicit and repeated instruction with
plenty of opportunity for practice; to require the host of them in one pass is
setting the stage for failure. Furthermore, each of these skills manifests
differently according to the particular habits of mind of each content area; for
instance, it may not be intuitive to students what logical organization looks like
in a social studies essay versus a persuasive argument. For these reasons,
students need an abundance of opportunities for guided practice in brief and
lengthy writing assignments from which they will receive mastery-oriented
feedback. It is only after such extended practice that students will become
increasingly metacognitive about the writing process, and will “have the
flexibility, concentration, and fluency to produce high-quality first draft text
under tight deadline as well as the capacity to revisit and make improvements
to a piece of writing over multiple drafts when circumstances encourage or
require it.”
REFERENCES
Access Center. (2008). Genre study routines for expository text. Retrieved from
http://www.k8accesscenter.org/writing/genrestudy.asp
Access Center. (2008). Genre study routines for narrative text. Retrieved from
http://www.k8accesscenter.org/writing/genrestudynarrative.asp
Access Center. (2008). Teaching writing to diverse student populations.
Retrieved from
http://www.k8accesscenter.org/writing/knowledgebank.asp
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2007). Adolescent literacy toolkit and
lesson plans. Retrieved from
http://programs.ccsso.org/projects/adolescent_literacy_toolkit/
Graham, S., and Hebert, M. A. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing
can improve reading. A Carnegie Corporation Time to Act Report.
Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved from
http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Publications/WritingToRead_01.pdf
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. Retrieved from http://www.all4ed.org/files/WritingNext.pdf
or a summary here.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
For additional resources related to content-area writing, please see the
References for Unit 1: Session 4.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 59
Unit 2: Session 4
Session 4: Supporting Vocabulary in the Content
Areas
BEFORE THE SESSION



Read Bromley, K. (2007). Nine things every teacher should know about
words and vocabulary instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,
50(7), 528–537
Read Flanigan, K., & Greenwood, S.C. (2007). Effective content vocabulary
instruction in the middle: Matching students, purposes, words, and
strategies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(3), 226–238
Bring A sample content-area text you are currently using with your students
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1a. Analyzing how language changes in text across grade levels (page 11 of
Time to Act):
http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Publications/PDF/tta_Main.pdf
Page 60
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 4
1b. “What Makes You Say That?” Discussion Protocol:
http://pzweb.harvard.edu/vt/VisibleThinking_html_files/03_ThinkingRoutines/0
3d_UnderstandingRoutines/WhatMakes/WhatMakes_Routine.html
One of the simplest, and yet most powerful, thinking routines from Project
Zero’s repository:
1. What's going on?
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 61
Unit 2: Session 4
2. What do you see that makes you say that?
2. Three Levels of Text Protocol:
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org/protocol/doc/3_levels_text.pdf
Adapted by the Southern Maine Partnership from Camilla Greene’s Rule of 3
Protocol, 11/20/03.
Purpose
To deepen understanding of a text and explore implications for participants’
work
Facilitation
Stick to the time limits. Each round takes up to 5 minutes per person in a group.
Emphasize the need to watch air time during the brief “group response”
segment. Do 1–3 rounds. Can be used as a prelude to a text-based discussion or
by itself.
Roles
Facilitator/timekeeper (who also participates); participants
Protocol
1. Sit in a circle and identify a facilitator/timekeeper.
2. If participants have not done so ahead of time, have them read the text
and identify passages that they feel may have important implications for
their work.
3. A round consists of:

One person using up to 3 minutes to:
 Level 1: Read aloud the passage she/he has selected
 Level 2: Say what she/he thinks about the passage
(interpretation, connection to past experiences, etc.)
 Level 3: Say what she/he sees as the implications for his/her
work.

The group responding (for a total of up to 2 minutes) to what has
been said.
4. After all rounds have been completed, debrief the process.
To learn more about professional learning communities and seminars for
facilitation, please visit the School Reform Initiative website at
http://www.schoolreforminitiative.org
Page 62
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 4
3. Selecting Words to Teach (and Not to Teach)
Instructional
Purpose(s) –
Why these
words?
“Before”
Words
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
“Foot-in-theDoor” Words
“After”
Words
Words Not to
Teach
Page 63
Unit 2: Session 4
4. Texts to Analyze for Words to Teach
English Language Arts
Excerpt from The Things They Carried by Tim O'Brien (Chapter 1):
First Lieutenant Jimmy Cross carried letters from a girl named Martha, a junior
at Mount Sebastian College in New Jersey. They were not love letters, but
Lieutenant Cross was hoping, so he kept them folded in plastic at the bottom of
his rucksack. In the late afternoon, after a day’s march, he would dig his foxhole,
wash his hands under a canteen, unwrap the letters, hold them with the tips of
his fingers, and spend the last hour of light pretending. He would imagine
romantic camping trips into the White Mountains in New Hampshire. He would
sometimes taste the envelope flaps, knowing her tongue had been there. More
than anything, he wanted Martha to love him as he loved her, but the letters
were mostly chatty, elusive on the matter of love. She was a virgin, he was
almost sure. She was an English major at Mount Sebastian, and she wrote
beautifully about her professors and roommates and midterm exams, about her
respect for Chaucer and her great affection for Virginia Woolf. She often quoted
lines of poetry; she never mentioned the war, except to say, Jimmy, take care of
yourself. The letters weighed 10 ounces. They were signed Love, Martha, but
Lieutenant Cross understood that Love was only a way of signing and did not
mean what he sometimes pretended it meant. At dusk, he would carefully
return the letters to his rucksack. Slowly, a bit distracted, he would get up and
move among his men, checking the perimeter, then at full dark he would return
to his hole and watch the night and wonder if Martha was a virgin.
The things they carried were largely determined by necessity. Among the
necessities or near-necessities were P-38 can openers, pocket knives, heat tabs,
wristwatches, dog tags, mosquito repellent, chewing gum, candy, cigarettes, salt
tablets, packets of Kool-Aid, lighters, matches, sewing kits, Military payment
Certificates, C rations, and two or three canteens of water. Together, these
items weighed between 15 and 20 pounds, depending upon a man’s habits or
rate of metabolism. Henry Dobbins, who was a big man, carried extra rations; he
was especially fond of canned peaches in heavy syrup over pound cake. Dave
Jensen, who practiced field hygiene, carried a toothbrush, dental floss, and
several hotel-size bars of soap he’d stolen on R&R in Sydney, Australia. Ted
Lavender, who was scared, carried tranquilizers until he was shot in the head
outside the village of Than Khe in mid-April. By necessity, and because it was
SOP, they all carried steel helmets that weighed 5 pounds including the liner and
camouflage cover. They carried the standard fatigue jackets and trousers. Very
few carried underwear. On their feet they carried jungle boots—2.1 pounds—
and Dave Jensen carried three pairs of socks and a can of Dr. Scholl’s foot
powder as a precaution against trench foot. Until he was shot, Ted Lavender
carried 6 or 7 ounces of premium dope, which for him was a necessity. Mitchell
Sanders, the RTO, carried condoms. Norman Bowker carried a diary. Rat Kiley
Page 64
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 4
carried comic books. Kiowa, a devout Baptist, carried an illustrated New
Testament that had been presented to him by his father, who taught Sunday
school in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. As a hedge against bad times, however,
Kiowa also carried his grandmother’s distrust of the white man, his
grandfather’s old hunting hatchet. Necessity dictated. Because the land was
mined and booby-trapped, it was SOP for each man to carry a steel-centered,
nylon-covered flak jacket, which weighed 6.7 pounds, but which on hot days
seemed much heavier. Because you could die so quickly, each man carried at
least one large compress bandage, usually in the helmet band for easy access.
Because the nights were cold, and because the monsoons were wet, each
carried a green plastic poncho that could be used as a raincoat or groundsheet
or makeshift tent. With its quilted liner, the poncho weighed almost 2 pounds,
but it was worth every ounce. In April, for instance, when Ted Lavender was
shot, they used his poncho to wrap him up, then to carry him across the paddy,
then to lift him into the chopper that took him away.
Mathematics
Sample from Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The
challenges of adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New
York. Page 14.
A professor in a class of 30 random students offers to bet that there are at least
two people in the class with the same birthday (month and day, but not
necessarily year). Do you accept the bet? What if there were fewer people in
the class? Would you bet then?
Assume that the birthdays of n people are uniformly distributed among 365
days of the year (assume no leap years for simplicity). We prove that the
probability that at least two of them have the same birthday (month and day) is
equal to:
1 - 365 x 364 x 363 x ... x (365 - n + 1)
365n
What is the chance that among 30 random people in a room, there are at least
two or more with the same birthday? For n = 30, the probability of at least one
matching birthday is about 71%. This means that with 30 people in your class,
the professor should win the bet 71 times out of 100 in the long run. It turns out
that with 23 people, she should win about 50% of the time.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 65
Unit 2: Session 4
Here is the proof: Let P(n) be the probability in question. Let Q(n) = 1 – P(n) be
the probability that no two people have a common birthday. Now calculate Q(n)
by calculating the number of n birthdays without any duplicates and divide by
the total number of n possible birthdays. Then solve for P(n). The total number
of n birthdays without duplicates is:
365 × 364 × 363 × ... × (365 – n + 1).
This is because there are 365 choices for the first birthday, 364 for the next and
so on for n birthdays. The total number of n birthdays without any restriction is
just 365n because there are 365 choices for each of n birthdays. Therefore, Q(n)
equals
365 x 364 x 363 x ... x (365 - n + 1)
365n
Solving for P(n) gives P(n) = 1 – Q(n) and hence our result.
History/Social Studies
Excerpt from Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The
challenges of adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New
York. Page 7.
If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could then
better judge what to do, and how to do it.
We are now far into the fifth year, since a policy was initiated, with the avowed
object, and confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation.
Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only, not ceased, but
has constantly augmented.
In my opinion, it will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached, and
passed.
“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”
I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.
I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall —
but I do expect it will cease to be divided.
It will become all one thing or all the other.
Page 66
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 4
Either the opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it
where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate
extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in
all the States, old as well as new — North as well as South.
Have we no tendency to the latter condition?
Let any one who doubts, carefully contemplate that now almost complete legal
combination — piece of machinery so to speak — compounded of the Nebraska
doctrine, and the Dred Scott decision. Let him consider not only what work the
machinery is adapted to do, and how well adapted; but also, let him study the
history of its construction, and trace, if he can, or rather fail, if he can, to trace
the evidence of design and concert of action, among its chief architects, from
the beginning….
Science
Sample from The Free High School Science Texts. (2008). Textbooks for High
School Students Studying the Sciences: Physics, Grades 10–12, Version 0. Page
161.
7.6.2 Fiber Optics
Total internal reflection is a powerful tool since it can be used to confine light.
One of the most common applications of total internal reflection is in fiber
optics. An optical fiber is a thin, transparent fiber, usually made of glass or
plastic, for transmitting light. Optical fibers are usually thinner than a human
hair! The construction of a single optical fiber is shown in Figure 7.23. The basic
functional structure of an optical fiber consists of an outer protective cladding
and an inner core through which light pulses travel. The overall diameter of the
fiber is about 125 μm (125×10−6m) and that of the core is just about 10 μm
(10×10−6m). The mode of operation of the optical fibers, as mentioned above,
depends on the phenomenon of total internal reflection. The difference in
refractive index of the cladding and the core allows total internal reflection in
the same way as happens at an air-water surface. If light is incident on a cable
end with an angle of incidence greater than the critical angle then the light will
remain trapped inside the glass strand. In this way, light travels very quickly
down the length of the cable.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 67
Unit 2: Session 4
Fiber Optics in Telecommunications
Optical fibers are most common in telecommunications, because information
can be transported over long distances, with minimal loss of data. The
minimized loss of data gives optical fibers an advantage over conventional
cables. Data is transmitted from one end of the fiber to another in the form of
laser pulses. A single strand is capable of handling over 3000 simultaneous
transmissions which is a huge improvement over the conventional co-axial
cables. Multiple signal transmission is achieved by sending individual light pulses
at slightly different angles. For example if one of the pulses makes a 72,23
angle of incidence then a separate pulse can be sent at an angle of 72,26! The
transmitted data is received almost instantaneously at the other end of the
cable since the information coded onto the laser travels at the speed of light!
During transmission over long distances repeater stations are used to amplify
the signal which has weakened somewhat by the time it reaches the station.
The amplified signals are then relayed towards their destination and may
encounter several other repeater stations on the way.
AFTER THE SESSION (FOR NEXT TIME…)

Page 68
Review the brief online article “Explicit Vocabulary Instruction” on Adlit.org

What reinforces material we’ve just learned/discussed? Is there
anything that conflicts?

What strategies are we already using?

What strategies introduced in earlier sessions can now be viewed as
“vocabulary strategies?”

What other resources do we need to explore in order to improve
vocabulary instruction?
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 4
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
CCRAS for Language, Grades 6-12: 3, 4, 5, 6
The College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Language Grades 6-12
describe complex and sophisticated expectations for students’ vocabularies. In
addition to being able to demonstrate command of standard English
conventions in speaking and writing, students are expected to “have extensive
vocabularies, built through reading and study, enabling them to comprehend
complex texts and engage in purposeful writing about and conversations around
content.” The standards acknowledge the inextricable link between vocabulary
knowledge and students’ ability to be successful in reading and writing
activities, which are the primary determinants of college and career readiness.
Furthermore, students are expected to acquire and accurately use a range of
general academic and domain-specific words and to apply knowledge of the way
in which language functions in different contexts. This means that thoughtful,
multi-faceted instruction of academic words and word-learning strategies, along
with ample opportunity to use the words, can drive students’ success in
secondary school and beyond into higher education and career positions.
REFERENCES
Bromley, K. (2007). Nine things every teacher should know about words and
vocabulary instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50(7),
528–537.
Carnegie Council on Advancing Adolescent Literacy. (2010). Time to act: An
agenda for advancing adolescent literacy for college and career success.
Chapter 2: The challenge: What it will take to get our adolescents
college and career ready. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New
York. Retrieved from
http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Publications/PDF/tta_Main.pdf
Flanigan, K., & Greenwood, S.C. (2007). Effective content vocabulary instruction
in the middle: Matching students, purposes, words, and strategies.
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(3), 226–238.
McEwan, E. K. (2007). 40 ways to support struggling readers in content
classrooms, grades 6-12. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Retrieved
from http://www.adlit.org/article/19792
Southwest Educational Development Laboratory Strategies. (2010). Building
reading proficiency at the secondary level: a guide to resources.
Retrieved from http://www.sedl.org/pubs/reading16/12.html
Strategic Education Research Partnership. (2008). Considering the research.
Retrieved from http://wordgeneration.org/pd2.html
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 69
Unit 2: Session 4
U.S. Department of Education. (2008). Explicit vocabulary instruction. Retrieved
from http://www.adlit.org/article/27738
Word Generation Project. (2008). Middle school literacy development using
academic language. Retrieved from http://wordgeneration.org/
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Allen, J. (1999). Words, words, words. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (2006). Developing literacy in second-language
learners: Report of the national literacy panel on language minority
children and youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; Washington,
D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics. Retrieved from
http://www.cal.org/resources/pubs/developliteracy.html
Bailey, A. L. (2007). The language demands of school: Putting academic English
to the test. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Baumann, J. F., & Kameenui, E. J. (2004). Vocabulary instruction: Research to
practice. New York: The Guilford Press.
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust
vocabulary instruction. New York: Guilford.
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2008). Creating robust vocabulary:
Frequently asked questions & extended examples. New York: Guilford
Press.
Bromley, K. (2007). Nine things every teacher should know about words and
vocabulary instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50(7),
528–537.
Bromley, K. (2009). Vocabulary instruction in the secondary classroom. In S. R.
Parris, D. Fisher, & K. Headley (Eds.), Adolescent literacy, field
tested (pp. 58-69). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and
learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Farstrup, A., & Samuels, S. (2008). What Research has to say about vocabulary
instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Word wise and content rich, grades 7-12.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Freeman, Y. S., & Freeman, D. E. (2008). Academic language for English
language learners and struggling readers: How to help students succeed
across content areas. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Ganske, K. (2000). Word journeys: Assessment-guided phonics, spelling, and
vocabulary instruction. New York: The Guilford Press.
Graves, M. F. (2006). The vocabulary book. New York: Teachers College Press.
Graves, M. F. (2009). Essential readings on vocabulary instruction. Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
Jewell, M. (2009). Moving beyond intermediate English proficiency. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(3), 259–262.
Page 70
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 2: Session 4
Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., and Torgesen, J.
(2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and
intervention practices: A practice guide (NCEE #2008-4027).
Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional
Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of
Education. Retrieved from
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practiceguides/adlit_pg_082608.pdf
Lewis, J. (2007). Academic literacy: Principles and learning opportunities for
adolescent readers. In J. Lewis, & G. Moorman (Eds.), Adolescent
literacy instruction (pp. 143-166). Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.
McEwan, E. K. (2007). 40 ways to support struggling readers in content
classrooms, grades 6-12. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Manyak, P.C., & Bauer, E. (2009). English vocabulary instruction for English
learners. The Reading Teacher, 63(2), 174–176.
Onish, L. (2010). Vocabulary packets: Greek & Latin roots. New York: Scholastic
Teaching Resources.
Torgesen, J. K., Houston, D. D., Rissman, L. M., Decker, S. M., Roberts, G.,
Vaughn, S., Wexler, J. Francis, D. J, Rivera, M. O., Lesaux, N. (2007).
Academic literacy instruction for adolescents: A guidance document
from the Center on Instruction. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research
Corporation, Center on Instruction. Retrieved from
http://www.centeroninstruction.org/files/Academic%20Literacy.pdf
Townsend, D. (2009). Building academic vocabulary in after-school settings:
Games for growth with middle school English-language learners. Journal
of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(3), 242–251.
Witherell, N., & McMackin, M. (2009). Teaching vocabulary through
differentiated instruction with leveled graphic organizers. New York:
Scholastic Teaching Resources.
Yopp, H. K., Yopp, R. H., & Bishop, A. (2008). Vocabulary instruction for academic
success. Huntington Beach, CA: Shell Education Publishers.
Zwiers, J. (2007). Building academic language: Essential practices for content
classrooms, grades 5-12. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Online Resources:





Academic Word List
Academic Word List Simple HTML Presentation
Academic Word List Exercises
Bromley Vocabulary Article Podcast
Doing What Works, Department of Education: Adolescent
Vocabulary Instruction
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 71
Unit 2: Session 4
 Fisher and Frey Word Wise and Content Rich Resources &







PowerPoint Slides
Language in the Mathematics Classroom PowerPoint Presentation
(Fisher & Frey)
SEDL List of Vocabulary & Comprehension Strategies
The National Writing Project: Annotated Bibliography of Vocabulary
Research
Visual Thesaurus for Selecting and Teaching Words
Voice of Literacy Podcasts: Meaningful Word Parts in
Comprehension Instruction
Word Generation Middle School Vocabulary Project
Word Generation Bibliography of Vocabulary Readings & Resources
Video Clips:
 Doing What Works, Department of Education: Vocabulary


Page 72
Instruction Video Clips
Doug Fisher & Nancy Frey — Vocabulary Video Clips/Podcasts/PDFs
Word Generation Video Clips of Vocabulary Instruction
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 3 Overview
UNIT 3: SUPPORTING STRUGGLING READERS AND
WRITERS
Although there have been slight gains in the reading achievement of U.S.
adolescents over the past decade (National Center for Education Statistics,
2009), many middle and high school students nationwide continue to struggle
with reading and writing at the secondary level. When Biancarosa & Snow
(2004) wrote that “70 percent of students entering the fifth and ninth grades in
2006 are reading below grade level” (p. 4), and that “as many as 70 percent of
students struggle with reading in some manner, and therefore require
differentiated instruction” (p. 5), these facts and figures fueled a growing
national alarm now commonly referred to as the adolescent literacy crisis
(Jacobs, 2008). While these oft-cited statistics about struggling readers from
Reading Next (Biancarosa & Snow, 2004) may have shifted slightly since the
report’s first publication, the general tenor of the report remains true — an
unacceptable number of middle and high school students in the United States
are woefully unprepared for the reading and writing demands of college and the
workplace. This fact is highlighted in a recent report by ACT (2009), stating that
only 67% of graduating high school seniors (according to ACT’s subject-area test
scores) were prepared to meet the demands of college-level English courses.
Furthermore, only 42% of the graduating seniors in ACT’s national sample
scored well enough to indicate that they were ready for college-level math
coursework. Across all subject-area tests, only 23% of the seniors scored high
enough to indicate potential success across ELA, math, science, and social
studies courses (ACT, 2009). Clearly, middle and high school teachers are facing
a huge challenge in preparing their students for increasingly sophisticated
college and workplace demands.
The question then becomes: How do we begin to support those adolescents
who struggle with reading and writing in our middle and high school
classrooms? Modules 3 and 4 address this question at length, reviewing the
literacy assessment and intervention practices that can support all students,
including those with learning differences who need extra support. Therefore,
the goal of Unit 3 is to introduce some general principles for how to provide
supports for students who might be struggling with content-area literacy tasks.
By the end of the unit, participants should be able to:
1. Identify a few ways to differentiate reading/writing instruction in
their content-area classes;
2. Identify common expository text structures and teach those
structures to students;
3. Begin using multiple texts (i.e., text sets) to teach content-area
concepts; and
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 73
Unit 3 Overview
4. Identify and use graphic organizers that encourage disciplinespecific thinking, reading, and writing.
REFERENCES
ACT. (2009). 2009 ACT national and state scores. Retrieved from
http://www.act.org/news/data/09/index.html
Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next: A vision for action and
research in middle and high school literacy: A report from Carnegie
Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent
Education. Retrieved from http://www.all4ed.org/files/ReadingNext.pdf
Jacobs, V. A. (2008). Adolescent literacy: Putting the crisis in context. Harvard
Educational Review, 78(1), 7-39.
National Center for Education Statistics (2009). The nation's report card:
Reading 2009 (NCES 2010–458). Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.
Department of Education: Washington, D.C.
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS, AT A GLANCE
The College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards (CCRAS) for Grades 6-12
describe what students should understand and be able to do in Reading, Writing,
Speaking and Listening, and Language by the time they leave high school. Each
session features a brief discussion of its relevance to Common Core Standards,
but the following chart offers a quick view of specific CCS correlations in this unit.
For specific standards language, please visit www.corestandards.org and locate
the ELA anchor standards on pp. 35, 41, 48, and 51.
Page 74
UNIT 1
Session 1
Session 2
Session 3
Reading
All
2, 3, 5, 9, 10
Writing
All
N/A
N/A
1, 2, 4
Listening &
Speaking
All
N/A
N/A
N/A
Language
All
N/A
N/A
N/A
10
Session 4
1, 2, 3, 5, 9
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 3: Session 1
Session 1: Identifying Ways to Support Struggling
Readers and Writers
BEFORE THE SESSION

Read one of the four literacy Q & A documents from the CCSSO Adolescent
Literacy Toolkit:




CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: English language arts literacy Q & A,
Janice Dole
CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: Math literacy Q & A, Russell Gersten
CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: Science literacy Q & A, Elizabeth Birr
Moje
CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: Social studies literacy Q & A, Cynthia
Shanahan
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1. Generate, Sort, Connect, and Elaborate Discussion Protocol:
http://pzweb.harvard.edu/vt/VisibleThinking_html_files/03_ThinkingRoutines/0
3d_UnderstandingRoutines/Understand_pdfs/VT_GSCE.pdf
These steps will help us to better understand our current thoughts about
“Differentiated Instruction.”




Generate a list of ideas and initial thoughts that come to mind when
you think about this particular topic/issue.
Sort your ideas according to how central or tangential they are. Place
central ideas near the center and more tangential ideas toward the
outside of the page.
Connect your ideas by drawing connecting lines between ideas that
have something in common. Explain and write in a short sentence how
the ideas are connected.
Elaborate on any of the ideas/thoughts you have written so far by
adding new ideas that expand, extend, or add to your initial ideas.
Continue generating, connecting, and elaborating new ideas until you feel you
have a good representation of your understanding.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 75
Unit 3: Session 1
2. Links to CCSSO Adolescent Literacy Q & A Documents:
http://programs.ccsso.org/projects/adolescent_literacy_toolkit/




CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: English language arts literacy Q & A,
Janice Dole
CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: Math literacy Q & A, Russell Gersten
CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: Science literacy Q & A, Elizabeth Birr
Moje
CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: Social studies literacy Q & A, Cynthia
Shanahan
What suggestions do these authors provide for differentiating instruction in
content-area classrooms?
How do these video clips demonstrate these practices?

Reciprocal Teaching Video Clip:
 http://dww.ed.gov/see/?T_ID=23&P_ID=60&cID=54&c1=1084#clust
er-1

Text Discussions, Marking Up Text, Metacognitive Logs in Science Video
Clips:
 http://dww.ed.gov/see/?T_ID=23&P_ID=61

Student-guided Vocabulary Routines in Content-area Classrooms:
 http://dww.ed.gov/see/?T_ID=23&P_ID=59
3. Jigsaw Organizer from Adlit.org:
http://www.adlit.org/strategies/22371/Word Format/PDF
Page 76
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
From Our Classroom Strategy Library
Jigsaw
Activity
Unit 3:
Session 1
Name
Topic
As you read and discuss with your group, write down important facts about your topic. After you
have become an expert on your own topic, you will share your findings with a group of
classmates, and learn about their topics as well.
Important Ideas
1.
2.
3.
Summary
Other Facts
All About Adolescent Literacy
www.adlit.org
Resources for Parents and Educators of Kids Grades 4—12
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 77
Unit 3: Session 1
4. Links to Access Center Handouts on Universal Design and Differentiating
Instruction
Handouts on differentiation in the content areas:
http://www.k8accesscenter.org/training_resources/differentiationmodule.asp
Handout on 8 general strategies for differentiation:
http://www.k8accesscenter.org/training_resources/documents/15HourDifferen
tiationModule/Handouts/HO1DiffStrategiesChart.doc
Handouts related to Universal Design for Learning:
http://www.k8accesscenter.org/index.php/category/universal-design/
5. Gradual Release of Responsibility Conversation
Doing What Works Video Clip and Related Questions — I Do, We Do, You Do:
Scaffolding Reading Comprehension in Social Studies:
http://dww.ed.gov/see/?T_ID=23&P_ID=60&c1=1084&c2=1087
 What is this teacher doing to support all students? How are her

practices especially supporting struggling readers/writers?
How can we, as a department/team/school, carefully model the
content-area reading/writing skills we want students to master?
AFTER THE SESSION (FOR NEXT TIME…)


Read Graves, M., & Graves, B. (2003). Chapter 9: Assessing text difficulty
and accessibility. Scaffolding reading experiences: Designs for student
success. Retrieved from
http://www.onlinereadingresources.com/sre/SRECha_9.pdf
Bring A sample content-area text you are currently using with your
students.
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
Despite the fact that our students have infinite differences in the ways they
learn, the Common Core Standards hold them to the same expectations for
what they should know and be able to do in order to be college and career
ready. Beyond the Common Core, students will also be measured by such
Page 78
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 3: Session 1
standardized tests as the SAT, ACT, and GRE, and each of these tests will require
students to demonstrate a high level of knowledge and skills. For this reason, it
is incumbent upon teachers to differentiate instruction in order to help all
students reach the goals and expectations outlined in the Common Core
Standards. To do so, teachers should begin by working in their school
communities to determine the range of diversity in their learners, and then to
decide what differentiated instruction looks like based on their student
demographics. Furthermore, teachers should keep in mind that each of the
Common Core Standards is a multifaceted goal, and that students might need
support in meeting the parts of each goal before meeting the entire goal is
possible.
REFERENCES
The Access Center. (2005). Enhancing your instructional skills through
differentiation. Washington, D.C.: American Institutes for Research.
Retrieved from:
http://www.k8accesscenter.org/training_resources/differentiationMod
ule.asp
Access Center. (n.d.). Enhancing your instruction through differentiation.
Retrieved from
http://www.k8accesscenter.org/training_resources/differentiationMod
ule.asp
Dole, J. (n.d.). CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: English language arts literacy Q
& A, Janice Dole. Retrieved from
http://programs.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/ELA_Complete%20Set_Final.pd
f
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Frey, N. (n.d.). Re-visioning intervention: RtI2 in secondary. PowerPoint
Presentation. Retrieved from http://www.fisherandfrey.com/wpcontent/uploads/2010/02/rti2-secondary.ppt
Gersten, R. (n.d.). CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: Math literacy Q & A, Russell
Gersten. Retrieved from
http://programs.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/Math_Complete%20Set_Final.
pdf
Moje, E. B. (n.d.). CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: Science literacy Q & A,
Elizabeth Birr Moje. Retrieved from
http://programs.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/Science_Complete%20Set_Final.
pdf
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 79
Unit 3: Session 1
Shanahan, C. (n.d.). CCSSO adolescent literacy toolkit: Social studies literacy Q &
A, Cynthia Shanahan. Retrieved from
http://programs.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/SS_Complete%20Set_Final.pdf
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Benjamin, A. (2002). Differentiated instruction: A guide for middle and high
school teachers. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
Denton, C., Bryan, D., Wexler, J., Reed, D., & Vaughn, S. (2007). Effective
instruction for middle school students with reading difficulties.
Retrieved from
http://www.meadowscenter.org/vgc/downloads/middle_school_instru
ction/_RTS_Complete.pdf
Gambrell, L. B., Morrow, L. M., & Pressley, M. (2006). Best practices in literacy
instruction (3rd Ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Ross, D., & Frey, N. (2009). Learners need purposeful and systematic
instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(1), 75–78.
Online Resources:

Overview of Gradual Release of Responsibility PowerPoint from Doug
Fisher & Nancy Frey

From The Access Center:





Page 80
Differentiated Instruction for Writing
Differentiation Strategies Chart
Math Differentiation Brief
Reading Differentiation Brief
Science Differentiation Brief
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 3: Session 2
Session 2: Considering Text Structure
BEFORE THE SESSION


Read Graves, M., & Graves, B. (2003). Chapter 9: Assessing text difficulty
and accessibility. Scaffolding reading experiences: Designs for student
success. Retrieved from
http://www.onlinereadingresources.com/sre/SRECha_9.pdf
Bring A sample content-area text you are currently using with your
students.
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1. List of Text Features from Graves & Graves (2003)










Vocabulary
Sentence Structure
Length
Elaboration
Coherence and Unity
Text Structure
Familiarity of Content and Background Knowledge Required
Audience Appropriateness
Quality and Verve of the Writing
Interestingness
What do these elements mean/look like? Which do Graves & Graves highlight
more than others? Which do you see as most/least important in determining
readability?
2. Brainstorming Signal Words
What words would you expect to see in a text that might “signal” the presence
of one or more of these structures?
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 81
Unit 3: Session 2





Description
Cause and Effect
Comparison and Contrast
Ordering and Sequencing
Problem and Solution
3. Analyzing Sample Texts
Looking at a sample content-area text that you brought to this session, answer
the following questions:



What major text structures do you notice?
What signal words would you want to highlight for students?
What graphic organizer(s) might help students better understand the
structure and meaning of the text?
The following websites contain graphic organizers and lessons on text structure
that might be useful in considering how to teach signal words/text structures:






Adlit.org’s Strategy Library
Houghton Mifflin’s Education Place: Free Graphic Organizers
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory’s Graphic Organizers
Recipes4Success Graphic Organizers
ReadWriteThink.org’s Graphic Organizer Lessons
Southwest Georgia Regional Educational Service Agency (RESA) Math
Graphic Organizers
Also, if you did not bring a sample text, or would like to analyze a text together
as a group, please use the sample texts provided in Unit 2: Session 4.
AFTER THE SESSION (FOR NEXT TIME…)

Review text structure with your students:

Try introducing text structure/signal words/structure-oriented graphic
organizers in your classes. Then note the following:


Page 82
What happened? What worked well? What challenges did you
encounter?
Which text structures are most common in your discipline?
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 3: Session 2

Which discipline-specific structures might you identify and
teach?
The idea here is to begin experimenting in your classroom with teaching
students about different text structures. Knowing about a text’s structure helps
students make meaning of the text. Consider how specific structures/signal
words can be matched to instructional purposes and discipline-specific texts. Be
prepared to share findings in our next professional development session.
For next time:




Read Shanahan, C. (2003). Using multiple texts to teach content. Naperville,
IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Read Tovani, C. (2004). Ch. 4: Real rigor: Connecting students with
accessible texts. In Do I really have to teach reading? Content
comprehension, grades 6-12. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Bring An available text set (from your classroom or school library).
Bring A textbook or reference text (i.e., a grammar guide) that students use
regularly.
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
CCRAS for Reading, Grades 6-12: 2, 3, 5, 9, 10
Teachers might unwittingly take for granted how critical the relationship
between text structure and comprehension can be, but in reality, the
organization of a text and the signal words used to advance an argument are the
primary indicators of the author’s meaning. The Common Core Standards for
reading expect that college- and career-ready students can explicitly analyze the
structure of a text and explain how the parts relate to one another and to the
meaning of the whole. Furthermore, students are expected to determine the
central ideas in a text and summarize their supporting details, analyze how ideas
develop and interact over the course of a text, and analyze the way two or more
texts address similar themes. Without direct instruction in text structure and
meaning-laden signal words, students may lack the text awareness needed to
accomplish these goals, and subsequently fail to reach the deep levels of
comprehension necessary for reading college-level texts and workforce
documents.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 83
Unit 3: Session 2
REFERENCES
Dickson, S. V., Simmons, D. C., & Kame’enui, E. J. (1995). Text organization and
its relation to reading comprehension: A synthesis of research. Eugene,
OR: National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators.
Graves, M., & Graves, B. (2003). Chapter 9: Assessing text difficulty and
accessibility. Scaffolding reading experiences: Designs for student
success. Retrieved from
http://www.onlinereadingresources.com/sre/SRECha_9.pdf
Piccolo, J.A. (1987). Expository text structure: Teaching and learning
strategies. The Reading Teacher, 40, 838–847.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Armbruster, B.B., Anderson, T.H., & Ostertag, J. (1989). Teaching text structure
to improve reading and writing. The Reading Teacher, 43, 130–137.
Carnegie Corporation of New York. (2010). The challenge: What it will take to
get our adolescents college and career ready. In Time to Act. New York:
Carnegie Corporation.
Dillabough, D. (2008). Text structures: Teaching patterns in reading and writing.
Toronto: Nelson, a Division of Thomson Canada.
Dymock, S. (2005). Teaching expository text structure awareness. The Reading
Teacher, 59(2), p. 177-182.
Fang, Z. (2008). Going beyond the fab five: Helping students cope with the
unique linguistic challenges of expository reading in intermediate
grades. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(6), 476–487.
Hiebert, E. H. (2002). Standards, assessments, and text difficulty. In A. E.
Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading
instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Simonsen, S. (1996). Identifying and teaching text structures in content area
classrooms. In D. Lapp, J. Flood, & N. Farnan (Eds.), Content area
reading and learning: Instructional strategies (2nd ed.). Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Online Resources:
 Adlit.org — Text Structure Classroom Strategies
 Slideshow on Text Structure By Author Emily Kissner
 Intervention Central’s Text Analysis Tool, For Determining Text

Page 84
Difficulty
Lexile.com — For Help Determining Text Difficulty
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 3: Session 3
Session 3: Text Considerations, Part 2: Multiple
Texts and Multiple Purposes
BEFORE THE SESSION




Read Shanahan, C. (2003). Using multiple texts to teach content. Naperville,
IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Read Tovani, C. (2004). Ch. 4: Real rigor: Connecting students with
accessible texts. In Do I really have to teach reading? Content
comprehension, grades 6-12. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Bring An available text set (from your classroom or school library).
Bring A textbook or reference text (i.e., a grammar guide) that students use
regularly.
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1. Sample Textbook Evaluation Forms:
A) From Crystal Springs Books, Staff Development for Educators (must download
& print)
B) Adapted From Irwin, J. & Davis, C. (1980). Assessing readability: The checklist
approach. Journal of Reading, 24(2), 124-130. (reproduced below)
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 85
Unit 3: Session 3
This checklist is designed to be used with expository texts only.
In the blank before each item, indicate Y for “Yes,” S for “Sort
of” or “to Some extent,” N for “No,” or Ñ for “does not apply.”
UNDERSTANDABILITY (TOTAL=________________)
(RATING KEY: Y=2, S=1, N or Ñ=0)
1. _____ The assumptions about students’ vocabulary knowledge are
appropriate.
2. _____ The assumptions about students’ prior knowledge are
appropriate.
3. _____ The assumptions about students’ general experiential
background are appropriate.
4. _____ New concepts are explicitly linked to the students’ prior
knowledge or to their experiential background.
5. _____ The text introduces abstract concepts by accompanying them
with many concrete examples.
6. _____ The text introduces new concepts one at a time, with a sufficient
number of examples for each one.
7. _____ Definitions are understandable and at a lower level of abstraction
than the concept being defined.
8. _____ The text avoids irrelevant details.
9. _____ The text explicitly states important complex relationships (e.g.,
causality and conditionality) rather than always expecting the reader to
infer them from the context.
10. _____ Is the text appropriate according to a readability formula? (USE ANY
AVERAGE FROM READABILITY FORMULA)
11. _____ I can support the content information from the text by directing
students to the examples in the text, and I will be able to extend the
lesson from those examples.
USABILITY (TOTAL=________________)
(RATING KEY: Y=2, S=1, N or Ñ=0)
1. _____ The title clearly defines the contents of the text.
2. _____ The text includes headings and subheadings.
3. _____ If the text includes headings and subheadings, it is easy to
differentiate between them. (For example, the font style of headings vs.
subheadings is different enough that a reader would not mistake a
subheading under the first heading to instead be a second heading.)
4. _____ If the text includes headings and subheadings, they provide
assistance in breaking the text into relevant parts.
5. _____ Technical terms and/or specialized vocabulary stand out from the
rest of the text (e.g., they are in a different font or they are listed in the
margins of the page).
6. _____ An adequate context is provided to allow students to determine
the meanings of technical terms and/or specialized vocabulary.
Page 86
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 3: Session 3
7. _____ Any and all charts, graphs, pictures, and/or illustrations appear
on the same or opposite page as the text reference to them. In other
words, you do not have to turn a page in order to find a chart, graph,
picture and/or illustration that the reading refers you to.
8. _____ Any graphs and charts are easy to read and are supportive of the
textual material.
9. _____ Any illustrations and pictures are of high quality, are appropriate
to the level of students, and are supportive of the textual material.
10. _____ The print size of the text is appropriate to the level of student
readers.
11. _____ Concepts are spaced appropriately through the text, rather than
being too many in too short a space.
INTERESTABILITY (TOTAL=________________)
(RATING KEY: Y=2, S=1, N or Ñ=0)
1. _____ Chapter titles, headings, and subheadings are interesting and
capture the reader’s attention.
2. _____ The writing style of the text is particularly interesting (e.g., the
author uses colorful language and/or humor).
3. _____ The layout and overall appearance of pages is interesting and
captures the reader’s attention
4. _____ Color is used to make the text more appealing.
5. _____ The text provides positive and motivating models for both sexes
as well as for other racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups.
6. _____ I am interested in using the text with my students.
7. _____ The text will help students generate interest as they relate
experiences and develop visual and sensory images.
8. _____ Does the text illustrate or describe how the content can and will
be used in the future?
9. _____ Does the action or illustration in the text realistically portray the
content under study?
10. _____ Are the activities motivating? Will most students want to
continue pursuing the topic?
11. _____ Each chapter displays a motivating content element for students
to read about or explore.
SUMMARY RATING: Find the sum for each section using the
RATING KEY as a guide).
Circle one choice for each item. (RATING KEY: Y=2, S=1, N or Ñ=0)
1. The text rates highest in understandability/usability/interest.
2. The text rates lowest in understandability/usability/interest.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 87
Unit 3: Session 3
STATEMENT OF STRENGTHS:
STATEMENT OF WEAKNESSES:
2. See/Think/Wonder Discussion Protocol:
http://www.pz.harvard.edu/vt/VisibleThinking_html_files/03_ThinkingRoutines
/03c_Core_routines/SeeThinkWonder/SeeThinkWonder_Routine.html
When reading/discussing Shanahan’s (2003) article “Using Multiple Texts to
Teach Content,” answer and discuss the following questions:



What do you see Shanahan saying in the article?
What do you think about what is being said?
What does it make you wonder about your own classes?
AFTER THE SESSION (FOR NEXT TIME…)
Things to remember:



Textbooks are powerful tools
Students need to know how to navigate textbooks
Yet, providing multiple texts for each unit allows:




Page 88
Choice of texts (increasing motivation/engagement)
Texts at different reading levels all students can access
Texts of different genres (motivation/engagement)
Opportunities for critical analysis/review/comparison
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 3: Session 3
For next time, participants should:







Try offering students multiple texts (this can be as few as 3-4) to read on
a topic. Then they should note the following:
What happened? What worked well? What challenges did you
encounter?
Which disciplinary-specific strategies/skills did you (might you) explicitly
teach?
Be prepared to report back on your findings in the next session.
Read Hall, T., & Strangman, N. (2002). Graphic organizers. Wakefield, MA:
National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved from
http://www.cast.org/system/galleries/download/ncac/NCACgo.pdf
Skim Adler, C. R. (2004). Seven strategies to teach students text
comprehension. Retrieved from http://www.adlit.org/article/3479
Bring A sample content-area text you are currently using with your
students.
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
CCRAS for Reading, Grades 6-12: 10
The Common Core Standards for reading are organized as categories, the last of
which is Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity. This choice of category
emphasizes the value placed on students’ ability to read a wide range of texts,
independently and proficiently, at varying levels of complexity and for different
purposes. Although textbooks are increasingly designed with attention to the
need for this variety, they are still constrained by factors such as grade level,
copyright permissions, and page limits. Consequently, content-area teachers
have an opportunity to build a personalized, more diverse (and likely more
accessible) range of reading materials that are not subject to the constraints
faced by textbook publishers. Providing students with ample and varied
opportunities for reading in challenging and supportive environments is a crucial
step toward helping them to meet the remaining standards for reading
readiness.
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 89
Unit 3: Session 3
REFERENCES
Shanahan, C. (2003). Using multiple texts to teach content. Naperville, IL: North
Central Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved from
http://www.learningpt.org/pdfs/literacy/shanahan.pdf
Tovani, C. (2004). Ch. 4: Real rigor: Connecting students with accessible texts. In
Do I really have to teach reading? Content comprehension, grades 6-12.
Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Vacca, R. T., & Vacca. J. L., Mraz, M. (2010). Content area reading: Literacy and
learning across the curriculum. Boston: Pearson.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Carr, Buchanan, Wentz, & Brant. (2001). Not just for primary grades: A
bibliography of picture books for secondary content teachers. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(2), 146-153.
Ebbers, M. (2002). Science text sets: Using various genres to promote literacy
and inquiry. Language Arts, 80(1), 40-50. Retrieved from
http://www.ed.sc.edu/raisse/pdf/ScienceArticles/ScienceTextSetsUsingVariousGenrestoPromoteLiteracy.pdf
Egawa, K. (n.d.). An exploration of text sets: Supporting all readers. Retrieved
from http://www.readwritethink.org/classroom-resources/lessonplans/exploration-text-sets-supporting-305.html
Keys, C., & Bryan, L. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with
teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 631–645.
Lotan, R. A. (2003). Group-worthy tasks. Creating Caring Schools, 60(6), 72-75.
Retrieved from
http://pdonline.ascd.org/pd_online/creating_sustaining/el200303_lota
n.html
Shanahan, C. (2003). Using multiple texts to teach content. Naperville, IL: North
Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Tovani, C. (2004). Do I really have to teach reading? Content comprehension,
grades 6-12. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Villano, T. L. (2005). Should social studies textbooks become history? A look at
alternative methods to activate schema in the intermediate
classroom. The Reading Teacher, 59(2), 122–130.
Online Resources:

Page 90
Voice of Literacy Podcasts: Informational texts in the classroom with Dr.
Barbara Moss: http://www.voiceofliteracy.org/posts/29466
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 3: Session 4
Session 4: Using Graphic Organizers to Overcome
Text Difficulty
BEFORE THE SESSION



Read Hall, T., & Strangman, N. (2002). Graphic organizers. Wakefield, MA:
National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved from
http://www.cast.org/system/galleries/download/ncac/NCACgo.pdf
Skim Adler, C. R. (2004). Seven strategies to teach students text
comprehension. Retrieved from http://www.adlit.org/article/3479
Bring A sample content-area text you are currently using with your
students.
DURING THE SESSION
Resources you will need during the professional development session:
1. Analyzing Three Graphic Organizers: http://www.adlit.org/strategy_library



First Lines/Downloadable Word File/PDF
List-Group-Label/Downloadable Word File/PDF
Double-Entry Journal/Downloadable Word File/PDF
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 91
From Our Classroom Strategy Library
Unit 3: Session 4
First Lines
Name
Title
First line
Prediction
Explanation
Revision
Page 92
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
From Our Classroom Strategy Library
List-Group-Label
Unit 3: Session 4
Name
Topic
In the first column, list all of the words you can think of that are related to the topic. Once you
have created your list, group the words based on their similarities. Label each group when you
are finished.
List
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Group and Label
Page 93
From Our Classroom Strategy Library
Double-Entry Journal
Adolescent Literacy
Name
Topic
As you read the text, select a few phrases that you find meaningful or
interesting. Write each phrase in the first column below, then write your
reaction (a comment, question, connection made, or analysis) each quote in the
second column.
Page
in text
Page 94
From the text
My thoughts
Unit 3: Session 4
2. Graphic Organizer Links for the Gallery Walk:






Adlit.org’s Strategy Library
Houghton Mifflin’s Education Place: Free Graphic Organizers
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory’s Graphic Organizers
Recipes4Success Graphic Organizers
ReadWriteThink.org’s Graphic Organizer Lessons
Southwest Georgia Regional Educational Service Agency (RESA) Math
Graphic Organizers
AFTER THE SESSION
Questions to Consider:

Which organizers seem to fit best with particular disciplines?

Which organizers seem useful across disciplines?

Which disciplinary habits of mind do certain organizers promote?
Things to remember:
Graphic organizers can be powerful tools…








When shared across content-area classes
When connected to specific content-area purposes
When modeled for students
When used as tools, not as products
When constructed/adapted/revised by students
When modified to suit disciplinary purposes
When modified to suit individual students’ needs
COMMON CORE CONNECTIONS
CCRAS for Reading, Grades 6-12: 1, 2, 3, 5, 9
CCRAS for Writing, Grades 6-12: 1, 2, 4
Teachers should keep in mind that graphic organizers are tools used to organize
thoughts and ideas, a step that is vital to both the reading and writing
processes. Good readers can distinguish between key ideas and details, and
graphic organizers allow all readers – but particularly those who struggle – to
see how their ideas relate to one another. This is incredibly helpful for abating
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 95
Unit 3: Session 4
confusion when ideas begin to cluster. Furthermore, good writers are able to
formulate clear and concise arguments and then support them with wellorganized and compelling evidence. Being able to list and organize ideas in the
prewriting process, as we discussed earlier in this Module, via the use of graphic
organizers, is a critical learning step that will help students become thoughtful
and thorough readers and writers.
REFERENCES
Adler, C. R. (2004). Seven strategies to teach students text comprehension.
Retrieved from http://www.adlit.org/article/3479
Hall, T., & Strangman, N. (2002). Graphic organizers. Wakefield, MA: National
Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved from
http://www.cast.org/system/galleries/download/ncac/NCACgo.pdf
Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The challenges of
adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Conley, M. (2008). Cognitive strategy instruction for adolescents: What we know
about the promise, what we don’t know about the potential. Harvard
Educational Review, 78(1), 84-106.
Carnegie Council on Advancing Adolescent Literacy. (2010). Time to act: An
agenda for advancing adolescent literacy for college and career success.
Chapter 2: The challenge: What it will take to get our adolescents
college and career ready. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New
York.
Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2009). Teaching content knowledge and reading
strategies in tandem. Retrieved from Adlit.org.
McMackin, M. C., & Witherell, N. L. (2005). Different routes to the same
destination: Drawing conclusions with tiered graphic organizers. The
Reading Teacher, 59(3), 242–252.
Tovani, C. (2004). Ch. 6: Holding thinking to remember and reuse. In Do I really
have to teach reading? Content comprehension, grades 6-12. Portland,
ME: Stenhouse.
Online Resources:




Page 96
Adlit.org’s Strategy Library
Houghton Mifflin’s Education Place: Free Graphic Organizers
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory’s Graphic Organizers
Recipes4Success Graphic Organizers
Adolescent Literacy Participant’s Resource Packet
Unit 3: Session 4


ReadWriteThink.org’s Graphic Organizer Lessons
Southwest Georgia Regional Educational Service Agency (RESA) Math
Graphic Organizers
Video Clips:

Doing What Works, Department of Education: Multi-media slideshow
illustrating use of graphic organizers
Module 2: Content-Area Literacy
Page 97