Pennington Publishing Blog

The International Literacy Association (ILA) recently (2016) released a position paper on dyslexia. The paper is mildly critical of those who tend to attribute reading difficulties to dyslexia. The paper, like many organizational position statements, pitches a few softballs at the International Dyslexia Association (IDA).

The IDA fired back with its own critique of the ILA’s position paper. In its response, the IDA criticizes what it perceives as misinterpretations of the research studies regarding dyslexia.The game quickly changed from softball to hardball.

The ILA had its ducks in a row (Was the organization anticipating a response from the IDA?) and tore into the ILA’s critique with an addendum to its original position paper: “Dyslexia: Response to the International Dyslexia Association.” In the addendum the ILA questions whether dyslexia is, indeed, a diagnosable condition, disputes the IDA’s advocacy of a one-size-fits-all solution to reading problems, i.e., systematic, explicit phonics instruction, and advocates abandoning the term, dyslexia, altogether. Quite a strong position paper from such a venerable reading institution!

Problems with the term, dyslexia.

The International Dyslexia Association offers a variety of definitions regarding dyslexia (bolded terms mine):

“Dyslexia is a neurological condition caused by a different wiring of the brain. There is no cure for dyslexia and individuals with this condition must learn coping strategies” (https://dyslexiaida.org/dyslexia-at-a-glance/).

“Dyslexia is, above all, a condition that impedes reading acquisition” (https://dyslexiaida.org/ida-urges-ila-to-review-and-clarify-key-points-in-dyslexia-research-advisory/).

Following is another more detailed definition of dyslexia, adopted by the IDA Board of Directors, Nov. 12, 2002 (bolded terms mine):

Dyslexia is a specific learning disability that is neurobiological in origin. It is characterized by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abilities. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonological component of language that is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective classroom instruction. Secondary consequences may include problems in reading comprehension and reduced reading experience that can impede growth of vocabulary and background knowledge (https://dyslexiaida.org/definition-of-dyslexia/).

Notice the multiplicity of reading problems purportedly attributed to dyslexia.

For example,

In 1990, E. Denis Wilson, a medical doctor in Florida invented what he modestly called “Wilson’s Temperature Syndrome” –a new condition he claimed was widespread, and causing a huge array of symptoms: fatigue, headaches, irritability, fatigue, dry skin, asthma, allergies and more. Wilson claimed his condition could be diagnosed by measuring body temperature. A lower than normal temperature confirms the diagnosis. According to Wilson, it was the slight reduction in body temperature that apparently causes the body’s metabolic pathways to function-sub-optimally, causing the vague symptoms reported. Your medical doctor doesn’t diagnose Wilson’s Temperature Syndrome because it’s a fake disease (https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/naturopathy-vs-science-fake-diseases).

Such tests lend credence to the notion that the condition is more prevalent than many would believe. The “you are not in this alone” assurance tends to be a key marketing strategy. The International Dyslexia Association claims that “Dyslexia affects 1 in 5 individuals, many of whom remain undiagnosed and receive little or no intervention services” (https://dyslexiaida.org/dyslexia-test).

Wilson recommended the use of thyroid hormone (T3) to treat his syndrome. Note that an invented condition always seems to have a snake-oil cure-all.

The International Dyslexia Association has systematic, explicit phonics instruction as its treatment and plenty of resources in its website’s bookstore. As a publisher, I provide science of reading-based resources built on word recognition and applying Scarborough’s Rope and the Simple View of Reading; however, I don’t purport to offer my programs as solutions to brain conditions.

But many ask why not simply agree to use the term, dyslexia, as a catch-all word for reading problems?

It would be tempting to do so; however, continuing to use this term, dyslexia, is counterproductive. The IDA’s classification of dyslexia as an incurable learning disability precludes using the term as a convenient synonym for reading problems. Although many struggling readers are certainly well-served with the explicit, systematic phonics approach advocated by those in the dyslexic camp, this instructional remedy and others should not be promoted as mere coping mechanisms. Reading specialists and reading intervention teachers know that targeted, assessment-based instruction can cure reading problems, not just provide simple band-aids.

To close, I agree with the conclusion of the International Literacy Association in its position paper addendum responding to the criticisms of the International Dyslexia Association:

“In other words, there is no empirical basis for the use of the term dyslexic to distinguish a group of children who are different from others experiencing difficulty acquiring literacy (“Dyslexia: Response to the International Dyslexia Association”).

Reading is a complex and multi-faceted process. Let’s abandon over-application of the dyslexia diagnosis and its purported treatments;

*****

FREE DOWNLOAD TO ASSESS THE QUALITY OF PENNINGTON PUBLISHING RESOURCES: The SCRIP (Summarize, Connect, Re-think, Interpret, and Predict) Comprehension Strategies includes class posters, five lessons to introduce the strategies, and the SCRIP Comprehension Bookmarks.

Get the SCRIP Comprehension Strategies FREE Resource:

*****

Teaching Reading Strategies

The Teaching Reading Strategies (Intervention Program) is designed for non-readers or below grade level readers ages eight–adult. This full-year, 55 minutes per day program provides both word recognition and language comprehension instructional resources (Google slides and print). Affordable, easy-to- teach, and science of reading-based, featuring the Sam and Friends Phonics Books–decodables designed for older students. The word recognition activities and decodables are also available as a half-year option in The Science of Reading Intervention Program.

PREVIEW TEACHING READING STRATEGIES and THE SCIENCE OF READING INTERVENTION PROGRAM RESOURCES HERE. 

 

Literacy Centers, Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Study Skills dyslexia, dyslexic, international dyslexia association, International Literacy Association, Mark Pennington, phonemic awareness, phonological awareness, reading comprehension, reading disability, reading fluency, response to intervention, Teaching Reading Strategies

As an educational publisher, I’ve made a few mistakes over the years… especially with titles. My grades 4-8 Differentiated Spelling

Instruction is a case in point: a terrific program series, which helps students catch up while they keep up with grade-level instruction. I chose the word, Differentiated, to indicate individualized, assessment-based instruction. However, to others in the Differentiated Instruction movement, this term meant student-choice, multi-modality learning styles. Not what I meant at all, but I’m stuck with the title.

Another colossal title failure was my grades 4-8 Teaching the Language Strand series. Shortly after the adoption of the Common Core State Standards, I assumed that everyone would begin referring to Common Core organizational  verbiage, including the key terms: strands. Wrong assumption. I had to rename my program as Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary . Obviously, a horrifically long title (even for a BUNDLED program).

However, by far, my greatest title failure has been for my flagship product, Teaching Reading Strategies. I thought that

this program, designed for reading intervention was aptly named for the assessment-based skill-building strategies to help students acquire phonemic awareness, phonics, syllabication, fluency, and comprehension. Wrong again. Teachers assumed that the strategies referred to the other types of reading strategies, and I still get questions such as “Where are the lessons on identifying elements of plot or differentiating between fact and opinion?”

I’ve spent time discussing the meanings we pour into educational terminology (in this case my own program titles), because we teachers often assume that we are all talking about the same instructional approaches and their applications when we really are not. This is especially true with reading strategies.

Let’s prove the point with an example: Word identification reading strategies are qualitatively different than, say, identification of main idea reading strategies. Let’s see why these differences matter.

Word identification is the process of determining the pronunciation and
some meaning of a word encountered in print (Gentry, 2006; Harris & Hodges,
1995). Readers employ a variety of strategies to accomplish this. Ehri (2004,
2005) identified four of them: decoding, analogizing, predicting, and recognizing
whole words by sight (https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/40373_3.pdf).

Thus, word identification strategies (I would differentiate a bit between identification and recognition, but that is beside the point) are the skills of reading, not reading as a meaning-making thinking activity.

Main idea is the gist of a passage; central thought; the chief topic of a passage expressed or implied in a word or phrase; the topic sentence of a paragraph; a statement that gives the explicit or implied major topic of a passage and the specific way in which the passage is limited in content or reference (csmpx.ucop.edu/crlp/resources/glossary.html).

Thus, main idea is not a reading strategy, such as “decoding, analogizing, predicting, and recognizing whole words by sight”; instead, identifying main idea strategies are meaning-making thinking activities that assist reader comprehension.

Reading research over the last 30 years has confirmed the former reading strategy (word identification) as a statistically significant positive correlate to good reading comprehension; however, the research has not established the same level of correlation for the latter specific reading strategy (identifying main idea) or the other meaning-making thinking activities. These latter types of instructional strategies are often referred to as reading comprehension strategies:

activation of prior knowledge, cause and effect, compare and contrast, fact and opinion, author’s purpose, classify and categorize, drawing conclusions, figurative language, elements of plot, story structure, theme, context clues, point of view, inferences, text structure, characterization, and others.

So Should We Teach Reading Strategies? Daniel Willingham, Professor of Cognitive Psychology at the University of Virginia, stirred up quite a pot in reading circles with his Washington Post article, in which he labels these reading strategies as “tricks,” and not “skill-builders” to improve reading comprehension. The Post published five successive articles in the “Answer Sheet” from Willingham’s  book, “Raising Kids Who Read: What Parents and Teachers Can Do.”

According to the professor,

Can reading comprehension be taught? In this blog post, I’ll suggest that the most straightforward answer is “no.” Reading comprehension strategies (1) don’t boost comprehension per se; (2) do indirectly help comprehension but; (3) don’t need to be practiced.

Essentially, Willingham acknowledges that

… children who receive instruction in …reading comprehension strategies (RCSs)… are better able to understand texts than they were before the instruction (e.g., Suggate, 2010). Why?

I suggest that RCSs are better thought of as tricks than as skill-builders. They work because they make plain to readers that it’s a good idea to monitor whether you understand.

In other words, teaching how to identify the main idea of a reading passage is not a transferable reading skill which once learned and practiced can be applied to another reading passage by a developing reader. However, the analysis of the text does teach the reader that understanding the meaning of the text is what reading is all about i.e., comprehension.

So, should we teach these reading comprehension strategies?

Gail Lovette and I (2014) found three quantitative reviews of RCS instruction in typically developing children and five reviews of studies of at-risk children or those with reading disabilities. All eight reviews reported that RCS instruction boosted reading comprehension, but NONE reported that practice of such instruction yielded further benefit. The outcome of 10 sessions was the same as the outcome of 50.

How much instructional time is devoted to RCSs in American schools? It’s hard to say, but research indicates that more than “just a little” is time that could be better spent on other things, especially (as noted yesterday) to building content knowledge.

My take-away? With beginning and struggling readers, spend more time on the reading strategies, such as word identification, that are truly skill-builders and worthy of ample instructional time and practice. My Teaching Reading Strategies reading intervention program focuses on these reading skills. In a related article I discuss why we shouldn’t teach reading comprehension. With all these “don’ts,” what should we “do?”

With all readers, spend more time on content knowledge, vocabulary, and independent reading. Do teach the reading comprehension “tricks,” but limit instructional time and practice. Focus practice more on the internal monitoring of text, such as with my five SCRIP reading comprehension strategies that teach readers how to independently interact with and understand both narrative and expository text to improve reading comprehension. The SCRIP acronym stands for Summarize, Connect, Re-think, Interpret, and Predict.

*****

The Teaching Reading Strategies (Reading Intervention Program) is designed for non-readers or below grade level readers ages eight-adult. Ideal as both Tier II or III pull-out or push-in reading intervention for older struggling readers, special education students with auditory processing disorders, and ESL, ESOL, or ELL students. This full-year (or half-year intensive) program provides explicit and systematic whole-class instruction and assessment-based small group workshops to differentiate instruction. Both new and veteran reading teachers will appreciate the four training videos, minimal prep and correction, and user-friendly resources in this program, written by a teacher for teachers and their students.

The program provides 13 diagnostic reading and spelling assessments (many with audio files). Teachers use assessment-based instruction to target the discrete concepts and skills each student needs to master according to the assessment data. Whole class and small group instruction includes the following: phonemic awareness activities, synthetic phonics blending and syllabication practice, phonics workshops with formative assessments, expository comprehension worksheets, 102 spelling pattern assessments, reading strategies worksheets, 123 multi-level fluency passage videos recorded at three different reading speeds, writing skills worksheets, 644 reading, spelling, and vocabulary game cards (includes print-ready and digital display versions) to play entertaining learning games.

In addition to these resources, the program features the popular Sam and Friends Guided Reading Phonics Books. These 54 decodable books (includes print-ready and digital display versions) have been designed for older readers with teenage cartoon characters and plots. Each 8-page book introduces two sight words and reinforces the sound-spellings practiced in that day’s sound-by-sound spelling blending. Plus, each book has two great guided reading activities: a 30-second word fluency to review previously learned sight words and sound-spelling patterns and 5 higher-level comprehension questions. Additionally, each book includes an easy-to-use running record if you choose to assess. Your students will love these fun, heart-warming, and comical stories about the adventures of Sam and his friends: Tom, Kit, and Deb. Oh, and also that crazy dog, Pug. These take-home books are great for independent homework practice.

FREE DOWNLOADS TO ASSESS THE QUALITY OF PENNINGTON PUBLISHING RESOURCES: The SCRIP (Summarize, Connect, Re-think, Interpret, and Predict) Comprehension Strategies includes class posters, five lessons to introduce the strategies, and the SCRIP Comprehension Bookmarks.

 

 

 

Get the SCRIP Comprehension Strategies FREE Resource:

Get the Diagnostic ELA and Reading Assessments FREE Resource:

Literacy Centers, Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Study Skills comprehension strategies, reading comprehension, reading instruction, reading intervention, reading skills, reading strategies, Teaching Reading Strategies

We’ve all heard them; most of us have all said them. Every profession has its share of cringeworthy and overused chatter: snarky comments, self-promoting babble, passive-aggressive suggestions, unwanted offers of support, gossipy grumblings, better-than-thou judgments, guilt-you-into observations, and shift the blame remarks. For teachers it’s in the staff room, in the work room, in the pod, in 504 meetings, in parent conferences, in admin evaluation meetings. Following are my Top 60. Would love to hear more of your favorites.

1. “I’m counting the days.”
2. “Why can’t they go to the bathroom during their preps?”
3. “It sounds like your kids are having a lot of fun today in your class; I can hear it in my room.”
4. “There is no I in team.”
5. “I don’t teach to the test.”
6. “Did anyone borrow some of my soda in the fridge?”
7. “Do you have a lot of copies to make?”
8. “I wish I could pull-off wearing that outfit of yours.”
9. “I just cleaned out the microwave last week.”
10. “We tried that years ago.”
11. “Would you watch my class for a minute?”
12. “It’s a research-based strategy.”
13. “I’ve got to get a real job.”
14. “That sub did not follow my lesson plan.”
15. “I know you must have taught ___________ last year, but the kids don’t know it.”
16. “Back in the day…”
17. “That’s funny; he behaves just fine for me.”
18. “I never use drill and kill worksheets.”
19. “You can do it during your prep.”
20. “You need to differentiate instruction.”
21. “The district says that…”
22. “Can I sneak in to make just one copy?”
23. “Have you met his parents? Now wonder that kid is messed up.”
24. “It looks like you could use some help.”
25. “I graded essays all weekend.”
26. “You look tired today.”
27. “Let’s review our group norms.”
28. “I teach the whole child.”
29. “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.”
30. You need to handle these accommodations.”
31. “You’re so smart giving a multiple-choice test for your final; I’m stuck grading all of these essays.”
32. “We support you 100%.”
33. “I teach to the Standards.”
34. “We’re role models.”
35. “Those who can’t do, teach; those who can’t teach, teach P.E.”
36. “Does anyone have anything to teach this afternoon?”
37. “They want us to carry guns, but they won’t trust us to control our own thermostats.”
38. “Thank you in advance for your help.”
39. “It’s easier to ask forgiveness than to get permission.”
40. “I’ll be done in just a minute.”
41. “I’ve just got too much on my plate.”
42. “Is it ___________ Break yet?” Thanksgiving, Winter, Spring, Summer
43. “I use group work all the time.”
44. “I run 12 literacy centers every day.”
45. “Does anyone have an agenda for this meeting?”
46. “I have to leave a bit early today. My kids…”
47. “Hmmm… What Standards are you teaching to?
48. “Could I pick your brain on this?”
49. “It’s all about the kids.”
50. “You need to work smarter, not harder.”
51. “I wish I knew how to spend less time grading like you do.”
52. “We have to learn to do more with less.”
53. “They cut down our custodial time again?”
54. “The problem is I care too much.”
55. “She’s not working up to her potential.”
56. “There’s no such thing as a stupid question.”
57. “This class is really bad (low) this year.”
58. “Can you believe what admin wants us to do now?”
59. “I follow best practices in my teaching.”
60. “That’s the way we’ve (I’ve) always done it.

Mark Pennington is the author of assessment-based ELA and reading intervention curriculum for grades 4-high school students. Check out Pennington Publishing for the finest in teacher-created curriculum, over 600 useful articles with FREE resources, and FREE assessments. Don’t forget to enter discount code 3716 at check-out for 10% off your entire purchase.

Grammar/Mechanics, Literacy Centers, Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Study Skills, Writing Mark Pennington, staff room, teacher expressions, teacher talk

See how much you know about mechanics (commas, capitalization, quotation marks, colons, apostrophes, semicolons, punctuation, etc.) by taking the 10 Question Mechanics Quiz for Teachers. Don’t worry; I’ll dispense with the usual “If you score 9 or 10 out of 10, you are…” Let’s keep things fun! Take out a pen and some scratch paper. Number from 1‒10.

I selected quiz items from the grades 4‒8 Common Core Anchor Standards for Language.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.7.2

Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling when writing.

Note: The Common Core authors call these components language conventions (along with Standard 1 grammar). Helpful links follow each question if you want to learn explore the grammatical topics.

The answers to the multiple-choice questions follow my promotional materials to ensure that you glance at my grammar and mechanics programs. Okay, so you’re probably not going to get all of these answers correct. I’m sure it’s just the way I’ve phrased the questions and/or answers. I would be happy to explain any of the distractors. Comments are welcomed (not welcome).

Mechanics Quiz for Teachers

1. According to the serial (Oxford) comma rule, which sentence is incorrectly punctuated?

A. Rafael, Louis and Tom met Luisa and Pablo at the coffee shop.

B. Choose the desk, table, or the huge, ugly chair for your apartment.

C. The bright morning sky, cool breeze, and warm company improved my mood.

D. I like most breeds of small dogs, but prefer cats, birds, and hamsters as pets.

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/the-serial-oxford-comma-for-the-want-of-a-nail/

2. According to compound sentence comma rules, which sentence is correctly punctuated?

A. Do you want donuts, or would you prefer scones?

B. Although frequently attacked by her critics, Alyssa continued to press for change.

C. I met Allen and we biked through the park.

D. The teacher was available from noon until three yet neither Jesse, nor Holly, wanted help.

http://grammartips.homestead.com/compoundsentences.html

3. According to introductory phrase comma rules, which sentence is incorrectly punctuated?

A. Through snow and sleet the postal carrier slogged the mail to our houses.

B. Compared to Mike, Huang, and Emily, the other students were quite prepared.

C. Tall and tan, the young man bore a striking resemblance to the actor.

D. Under my bed, I hid my baseball card collection.

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/607/03/

4. According to dependent (subordinate) clause comma rules, which sentence is correctly punctuated?

A. Whichever you choose, is fine with me.  B. Since you left, he has never been the same though he has received constant care.

C. I still received excellent service in spite of the delays.  D. Even though, she was ready on time, Suzanne still missed the appointment.

https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/grammar/punctuation-the-comma-and-the-apostrophe/commas-in-space-and-time/v/commas-and-introductory-elements-the-comma-punctuation-khan-academy

5. According to proper noun capitalization rules, which sentence is incorrectly punctuated?

A. Marvin “The Shark” Bentley had been brought up on racketeering charges by the District Attorney.

B. He was interrogated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation twice during the Cold War.

C. The U.S. Constitution specifies “High Crimes And Misdemeanors” as grounds for impeachment in Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5.

D. I saw the President of the United States speak at the Capitol on the Fourth of July.

https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/capitalizing-proper-nouns

6. According to abbreviation and acronym rules, which sentence is correctly punctuated?

A. David has worked outside of the U.S. in many foreign countries, but he now works for NASA.

B. Ms. Jennifer Jenkins, MD, went AWOL from Dr. Master’s practice.

C. Ikeda awoke to the screaming alarm at 6:00 A.M.

D. She earned her MA in Curriculum Development at U.C.L.A.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/about-words-clauses-and-sentences/abbreviations-initials-and-acronyms

7. According to quotation rules, which sentence is incorrectly punctuated?

A. I want to read the final chapter, “Return of the King,” before I go to sleep.

B. In The Declaration of Independence, did Jefferson say “…all men are created equal?”

C. He asked, “What did Dr. King mean in the ‘I Have a Dream’ speech by the phrase ‘free at last’?”

D. “Blowin’ in the Wind” was released on the 1963 album, Freewillin’ Bob Dylan.

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/22-quotation-mark-rules/ 

8. According to apostrophe rules, which sentence is correctly punctuated?

A. The wives’ dinner at the Jones’ place, followed by dessert at the Martins, showed off the women’s best recipes.

B. Bob and Jolene’s recipe was more popular than her’s.

C. Ethan and Mary’s reactions to the business proposal were quite different.

D. Charles’ books were found on the bookshelves at the Sanchez’s.

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/621/01

9. According to semicolon rules, which sentence is incorrectly punctuated?

A. All their work was wasted; the fund was depleted; and they had no future prospects.

B. Desmond asked for more than his fair share; Mark wondered why the paint would not dry.

C. She did absolutely none of the work; I did it all.

D. Dexter spent time in Chico and Redding in Northern California; El Cajon and San Diego in Southern California; and Visalia and Merced in Central California.

http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/semicolons_in_lists.htm 

10. According to colon rules, which sentence is correctly punctuated?

A. His list of accomplishments include: a marathon time of 4:25:34, a key to the city, and a blue ribbon at the Alabama State Fair.

B. I loved listening to “The Great Adventure: landing on the Moon” on my new phone.

C. The politician outlined three goals: A tax on steel imports, a single-payer health care system, and a higher minimum wage.

D. A whale is not a fish: nor is it a crustacean.

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/colon-2/ 

Want to take the 10 Question Grammar Quiz for Teachers? Check it out after you self-correct your mechanics quiz.

Answers: 1. A    2. D    3. D    4. C    5. A    6. A    7. B    8. A    9. B    10. C

*****

Teaching Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics (Grades 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and High School) are full-year, traditional, grade-level grammar, usage, and mechanics programs with plenty of remedial practice to help students catch up while they keep up with grade-level standards. Twice-per-week, 30-minute, no prep lessons in print or interactive Google slides with a fun secret agent theme. Simple sentence diagrams, mentor texts, video lessons, sentence dictations. Plenty of practice in the writing context. Includes biweekly tests and a final exam.

Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Interactive Notebook (Grades 4‒8) is a full-year, no prep interactive notebook without all the mess. Twice-per-week, 30-minute, no prep grammar, usage, and mechanics lessons, formatted in Cornell Notes with cartoon response, writing application, 3D graphic organizers (easy cut and paste foldables), and great resource links. No need to create a teacher INB for student make-up work—it’s done for you! Plus, get remedial worksheets, biweekly tests, and a final exam.

Syntax in Reading and Writing is a function-based, sentence level syntax program, designed to build reading comprehension and increase writing sophistication. The 18 parts of speech, phrases, and clauses lessons are each leveled from basic (elementary) to advanced (middle and high school) and feature 5 lesson components (10–15 minutes each): 1. Learn It!  2. Identify It!  3. Explain It! (analysis of challenging sentences) 4. Revise It! (kernel sentences, sentence expansion, syntactic manipulation) 5. Create It! (Short writing application with the syntactic focus in different genre).

Get the Diagnostic Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Assessments, Matrix, and Final Exam FREE Resource:

Get the Grammar and Mechanics Grades 4-8 Instructional Scope and Sequence FREE Resource:

 

Grammar/Mechanics, Spelling/Vocabulary, Study Skills, Writing abbreviations, acronyms, adjectives, adverbial clauses, adverbs, apostrophes, appositives, capitalization, colons, commas, Common Core Grammar, Common Core knowledge of use, Common Core language conventions, Common Core literacy standards, Common Core mechanics, common core spelling standards, Common Core vocabulary acquisition and use, Common Core vocabulary standards, Common Core Vocabulary Toolkit, common core writing standards, common nouns, comparative modifiers, complete sentences, complex sentences compound subjects, compound predicates, compound sentences, conjunctions, contractions, conventions, coordinating conjunctions, correlative conjunctions, declarative sentences, dependent clauses, diagnostic assessments, differentiate instruction, direct quotations, exclamation points, exclamatory sentences, fifth grade, formative assessments, fourth grade, fragments, future participle, future perfect tense, future tense, grammar tests, helping verbs, imperative sentences, independent clauses, indirect object, indirect quotations, interjections, intermediate, interrogative sentences, intervention, intransitive verbs, Language Conventions, linking verbs, mechanics, middle school, modifiers, mood, nominative case, nouns, parentheses, participle, parts of speech, past participle, past perfect tense, past tense, perfect tense, phrases, plural possessives, possessives, predicate, prepositional phrases, prepositions, present participle, present tense, pronoun antecedents, pronouns, proper nouns, punctuation, questions, quotation marks, remediation, run-ons, schoolhouse rock, semi-colons, semicolons, seventh grade, single subject, sixth grade, speaker tags, standardized tests, subject, subject case, subjunctive conjunctions, superlative modifiers, teachers, Teaching Grammar and Mechanics, test preparation, The Pennington Manual of Style, verbs, voice, worksheets

A reader of my Pennington Publishing Blog asked me to explain how my PQ RAR reading-study strategy (Preview-Question-Read-Answer-Review) for textbooks and expository/informational writing works with my SCRIP Comprehension Strategy Questions.  An excellent question.

Background

I used and taught the classic SQ3R (Survey, Question, Read, Recite, and Review) method of textbook reading for years and asked one of the reading professor in my MA program about the technique. He stated that considerable research had demonstrated the efficacy of the S and Q steps (Survey and Question); however, no empirical research seemed to warrant using the last two “R’s” (Recite and Review).  By the way, the related PQ3R strategy simply substituted Preview for the anachronistic Survey.

I went home and over the next few days hammered out my PQ RAR reading-study strategy (Preview-Question-Read-Answer-Review). I added the last R, Review, to the professor’s suggestion of A, Answer, because not all of the reader’s self-generated questions will be answered by the text. Some were answered by the author, but were not noted by the reader during the initial reading; some were not addressed by the text; some require additional research.

As a reading specialist, I shared the PQ RAR reading-study strategy with quite a few teachers at seven different sites and through professional development. Teachers and their students much preferred the PQ RAR reading-study strategy compared to the traditional SQ3R or PQ3R strategies. However, I knew that a critical element was missing.

Weeks later I shared my PQ RAR reading-study strategy with the same professor and my colleagues in the class. One of my fellow teachers commented on the first R (Read) saying, “Simply telling a student to read, looking for the answers to subtitle questions, is clearly inadequate. To build comprehension, we have to teach readers to cue themselves as they read to “talk to the text.” Brilliant!

The professor responded, “It’s both/and.” He first affirmed the importance of the Q (Question) step of developing and writing text-dependent questions from the subtitles and the end of chapter publisher questions. Next, affirmed the importance of the internal reader dialogue and self-monitoring comprehension during the R (Read) step. What he said next surprised all of us in the class.

The professor shared the research regarding self-questioning strategies. He summarized, ” The research shows that reader-generated questions of the text produce greater comprehension than teacher or publisher-generated comprehension questions.” Clearly, I needed to add something to the R (Read) step in my PQ RAR reading-study strategy.

So, back to the drawing board.

I designed the SCRIP (Summarize, Connect, Re-think, Interpret, and Predict) comprehension cues to cue the reader to explore and question a text independently, instead of being solely dependent upon author subtitles, publisher, or teacher questions and/or study helps. Now the first R (Read) made sense in my PQ RAR reading-study strategy .

Also, although the PQ RAR reading-study strategy is designed for expository text, I carefully designed the SCRIP question prompts to work with both expository/informational and narrative text.

Teachers commented on how the SCRIP method increased reader engagement with the text. Students said that asking questions of the text “made the authors seem like they were talking to us.”

I loved walking around with principals during class visitations and hearing the words Summarize, Connect, Re-think, Interpret, and Predict in teacher questions and, especially, in student questions and answers. The language of instruction was really catching on!

Teachers loved how the method worked for both expository and narrative texts. Being teachers, they starting creating. Soon I saw SCRIP questions as part of marginal annotations (margin notes), in literature circles and in online book clubs. Next, I saw SCRIP questions added to Cornell Notes templates. Fantastic… it works with lectures, too!

Years later I wrote and published the digitally-based Reading Fluency and Comprehension Toolkit. This affordable program provides 43 expository animal fluency articles and 43 corresponding animal comprehension worksheets (fillable PDFs for distance learning)–each with five SCRIP strategy questions (answers provided)–along with CORRESPONDING YOUTUBE VIDEOS WITH ALL 43 FLUENCIES RECORDED AT 3 DIFFERENT READING SPEEDS–129 IN ALL. PERFECT FOR MODELED READINGS.

Get the SCRIP Comprehension Cues FREE Resource:

The Science of Reading Intervention Program

The Science of Reading Intervention Program: Word Recognition (Phonemic Awareness, Spelling, and Phonics) includes explicit, scripted instruction and practice with the 6 Daily Google Slide Activities every reading intervention student needs: 1. Phonemic Awareness 2. Blending, Segmenting, and Spelling 3. Sounds and Spellings (including handwriting) 4. Heart Words Practice 5. Sam and Friends Phonics Books (decodables). 6. Elkonin Sound Box Spelling Dictations and digital and printable sound wall cards and speech articulation songs. Print versions are available for all activities. First Half of the Year Program (18 weeks)

The Science of Reading Intervention Program: Language Comprehension resources are designed for students who have completed the word recognition program or have demonstrated basic mastery of the alphabetic code and can read with some degree of fluency. The program features the 5 Weekly Language Comprehension Activities: 1. Background Knowledge Mentor Texts 2. Academic Language, Greek and Latin Morphology, Figures of Speech, Connotations, Multiple Meaning Words 3. Syntax in Reading 4. Reading Comprehension Strategies 5. Literacy Knowledge (Narrative and Expository). Second Half of the Year Program (18 weeks)

The Science of Reading Intervention Program: Assessment-based Instruction provides diagnostically-based “second chance” instructional resources. The program includes 13 comprehensive assessments and matching instructional resources to fill in the yet-to-be-mastered gaps in phonemic awareness, alphabetic awareness, phonics, fluency (with YouTube modeled readings), Heart Words and Phonics Games, spelling patterns, grammar, usage, and mechanics, syllabication and morphology, executive function shills. Second Half of the Year Program to Pair with Language Comprehension (18 weeks)

The Science of Reading Intervention Program BUNDLE  includes all 3 program components for the comprehensive, state-of-the-art (and science) grades 4-adult full-year program. Scripted, easy-to-teach, no prep, no need for time-consuming (albeit valuable) LETRS training or O-G certification… Learn as you teach and get results NOW for your students. Print to speech with plenty of speech to print instructional components.

Literacy Centers, Reading, Study Skills academic literacy centers, academic reading, close reading, Close Reading Article Template, Close Reading Article Worksheet, Close Reading Expository Worksheet, Close Reading Narrative Worksheet, close reading strategy, Common Core Standards, comprehension strategies, literacy centers, literary analysis, reader author relationship, reading academic literacy center, Reading Anchor Standards, reading comprehension, reading comprehension questions, reading literacy centers, reading stations, reading strategies, reading worksheets, SCRIP, SCRIP Comprehension, self-question strategies, SQ3R, text dependent questions

How do figures of speech and idiomatic expressions fit into vocabulary acquisition? ELA teachers do a great job of teaching the traditional figures of speech, metaphors and similes and many or the poetic devices, such as alliteration and personification in the context of literature and poetry. Check out a nice list with examples of the “Top 20” figures of speech with examples. 

However, most of us give short shrift to the colloquial forms of language which actually fill more literature and poetry than the venerable figures of speech. For example, in Shakespeare’s Richard III:

GLOUCESTER:
Off with his head! Now, by Saint Paul I swear,
I will not dine until I see the same.

RATCLIFF:
Dispatch, my lord [Hastings]; the duke would be at dinner:
Make a short shrift; he longs to see your head.

https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/short-shrift.html

The authors of the Common Core State Standards recognize the essential roles that colloquial expressions play in our English language. See the varied examples detailed in the Language Strand (L.5.a.). Did you know that the eighth grade standards include puns? I love that.

I especially appreciate the authors’ emphasis on teaching idiomatic expressions. Idiomatic expressions are more than just the archaic “A stitch in time saves nine” examples that I used to teach, one per day, and have my students illustrate for Open House.

In fact, our non-literal language fills what we read, say, and speak. For example, I love that idiom of ours: through the door. It always gets some head-shaking in my EL, SDAIE, ELD, ESL, etc. classes. But all languages are filled with colloquial language.

For example, when I arrived in Mexico City to really learn the language some years back, I already had six years of middle school and high school Spanish, one college conversational Spanish class and one Spanish-only literature class. I felt pretty confident with the language.

Upon my arrival I found that my new friends understood me just fine. However, I only understood about 50% of what was being said to me. My Spanish instruction was failing me. I knew the formal, but not the informal language.

My Mexican roommate asked me if I had a chamarca. It was 90 degrees out and humid, as well. Why was he asking if I had a jacket? I looked at him strangely, and he explained that he had substituted the slang, charmarca, for his novia. You see, chamarca is slang for girlfriend; while novia was the formal word for girlfriend I learned in Spanish classes back in the U.S.

Learning to really learn the language was all about learning the idiomatic expressions. Spanish uses a lot.

The Common Core State Standards emphasize a balanced approach to vocabulary development. Unlike some of the other ELA Standards, the vocabulary Standards are quite specific and especially so with figures of speech. Although much of our Tier 2 (academic language) vocabulary is acquired through reading challenging text, other methods of vocabulary acquisition are best taught through explicit, direct instruction. Take a moment to skim the vocabulary standards and see how you’re doing in your class or classes this year.

• Multiple Meaning Words and Context Clues (L.4.a.)
• Greek and Latin Word Parts (L.4.a.)
• Language Resources (L.4.c.d.)
• Figures of Speech (L.5.a.)
• Word Relationships (L.5.b.)
• Connotations (L.5.c.)
• Academic Language Words (L.6.0)

How to Teach Figures of Speech and Idiomatic Expressions

In my five vocabulary programs for grades 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 (details follow), I use the wide variety of figures of speech (stated and suggested by the Language Standards) to teach students what the figure of speech is, what it means, and how to use it properly. My vocabulary worksheets require students to practice the figure of speech in the writing context, using surrounding context clues to show the meaning of the figure of speech.

*****

For full-year vocabulary programs which include multiple meaning words (L.4.a.), Greek and Latin morphology with Morphology Walls (L.4.a.), figures of speech (L.5.a.), words with special relationships (L.5.b.), words with connotative meanings (L.5.c.), and academic language words (L.6.0), check out the assessment-based grades 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 Comprehensive Vocabulary.

Get the Grades 4,5,6,7,8 Vocabulary Sequence of Instruction FREE Resource:

Get the Greek and Latin Morphology Walls FREE Resource:

Get the Diagnostic Academic Language Assessment FREE Resource:

Literacy Centers, Spelling/Vocabulary, Study Skills Academic Language, academic language word lists, adages, affixes, colloquialisms, Common Core Vocabulary, Common Core Vocabulary Toolkit, connotations, consonants, context clues, conventional spelling, diagnostic spelling test, dictations, differentiate instruction, dramatic irony, eighth grade, encoding, fifth grade, figures of speech, flash cards, fourth grade, Greek, Greek and Latin, homographs, homonyms, homophones, idiomatic expressions, idioms, intermediate, intervention, Latin, Mark Pennington, metaphors, middle school, multiple-meaning words, personification, phonics, prefixes, proverbs, puns, quizzes, reading comprehension, reading fluency, remediation, roots, seventh grade, shades of meaning, similies, situational irony, sixth grade, sound-spellings, spelling games, spelling inventory, spelling patterns, spelling programs, spelling rules, spelling skills, spelling sorts, spelling tests, spelling word sorts, spelling worksheets, spelling-vocabulary patterns, standardized test, structural analysis, syllable rules, syllable transformers, syllables, teachers, test preparation, verbal irony, vocabulary, Vocabulary Academic Literacy Center, vocabulary games, vocabulary programs, vocabulary review, vocabulary review games, vocabulary skills, vocabulary standards, vocabulary word sorts, vocabulary worksheets, vowels, within word, word attack, word lists, word recognition, word relationships, word sorts, worksheets

Close Reading? A helpful, time-tested reading strategy, which was brought back to life in 2009 with the advent of the Common Core State Standards and the evangelical zeal of Common Core lead authors of the English-language Arts Standards, David Coleman and Susan Pimental. For those still getting re-acquainted with close reading, this definition should suffice from noted U.C. Berkeley reading-rearcher David Pearson (now a constructive critic of how the close reading strategy is currently being implemented) and co-author Margaret Gallagher:

Close Reading of text involves an investigation of a short piece of text, with multiple readings done over multiple instructional lessons. Through text-based questions and discussion, students are guided to deeply analyze and appreciate various aspects of the text, such as key vocabulary and how its meaning is shaped by context; attention to form, tone, imagery and/or rhetorical devices; the significance of word choice and syntax; and the discovery of different levels of meaning as passages are read multiple times. The teacher’s goal in the use of Close Reading is to gradually release responsibility to students—moving from an environment where the teacher models for students the strategies to one where students employ the strategies on their own when they read independently

P. David Pearson and Margaret C. Gallagher, “The Instruction of Reading Comprehension,” Contemporary Educational Psychology 8, no. 3 (July 1983) 317-344.

Specifically, the first and last C.C.S.S. Reading Anchor Standards address the importance of close reading:

1. Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions
drawn from the text.

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

As Pearson now notes, “We need a mid-course correction with close reading.”

My criticism of the how a good reading strategy (close reading) needs revision is three-fold:

1. Pre-reading strategies and pre-teaching are frowned upon in the new permutation of close reading. With our diverse student population, beginning a cold read or rigorous text borders on educational malpractice. Reading comprehension builds upon reading comprehension. The into reading step has a solid research base and can be teacher-led or student-researched. Now I’m not advocating a return to the counter-productive “Give students the Cliff’s Notes version of the reading prior to the first read” practice of the 1980s. We do want to promote Reading Anchor Standard 10 and its focus on developing reader independence.
2. I do applaud the focus on text-dependent questions to analyze expository and narrative text (Who wants to return to the beyond reading focus of constructing one’s own meaning from the author’s words?); however, in addition to some teacher or publisher questions, we need to return to the emphasis of interactive reading based upon reader (self)-generated question strategies. We need to bring back talking to the text to improve reading comprehension and to develop independence. Even the best teacher-generated questions lead students to a skim to find the answers approach to reading.
3. Again, I’m thrilled that the Common Core has renewed our focus on expository text. But, narrative has a place, too. And short selections of novels, as well as short stories, can serve as rigorous close readings. Close readings are not confined to articles. At the end of this article, I provide a FREE resource download of a Close Reading Narrative Worksheet.

Will These Mid-course Corrections Be Adopted?

Revision tends to take more time than wholesale change. Whether teachers will gradually buy into some of these mid-course corrections remains to be seen. We teachers can be an impatient bunch, and we often jump onto the bandwagon of new and improved education approaches which are neither new nor improved.

Most teachers have been in professional development settings in which the speaker advocated the necessity of gradual course changes. The speaker may even have trotted out the example of how long it takes an aircraft carrier (or a cruise ship) to turn around in the middle of the ocean. I looked up this metaphor and found an interesting response from naval seaman assigned to the carrier, George W. Bush.  This quote bears reading closely. He responds to the question of how long it takes a carrier to make a 180 degree turn (emphasis mine):

Few people will notice 1 degree per second which is easy to do at 30 kts, so 180 degrees would take about 3 minutes and operations could continue. This is a very realistic answer as the carrier must counter sea currents which may need 1 degree/sec of rudder. If nothing is loose on deck, MUCH more agressive [sic]turns can be taken as the deck will tilt 30 degrees into the turn. Anything not tied down will roll off into the ocean, i.e. equipment, airplanes, people, etc, and no planes could land or take off with such a turn in progress. These turns are done on first sea trials to prove that the rudder can handle the stress of a tight turn at max speed. Here I would estimate a full U turn (180 degrees) in well under 60 seconds, probably 30 seconds, but you’d want to hold onto something.

Now that we’ve finished our first close read, most of us found the main ideas and key details and were able to answer the BIG question: How long does it take an aircraft carrier to turn around? 

Let’s do our second close read, looking for craft and structure…

The naval seaman crafts his answer beginning with the usual and moving to the extraordinary. He moves from the impersonal “Few” in the first sentence to the personal “you’d” in the last. He uses two cause and effect structures: the first being the slow turn and its results; the second being the fast turn and its results.

Let’s do our third close read and mark up the text with marginal annotations, preparing to apply, discuss, and properly cite the information…

KEY RESULTS OF FAST TURN “Anything not tied down 1. will roll off into the ocean, i.e. equipment, airplanes, people, etc, and 1. no planes could land or take off with such a turn in progress” (Jones).

My take regarding the mid-course corrections of the close reading strategy is that a slow turn will produce greater long-term effects than a fast turn and will produce fewer casualties. We’ve made some significant progress in improving reading instruction during the last decade. Far fewer elementary and secondary teachers are solely teaching novels. Less class time is now devoted to unguided, free choice independent reading. More time is now spent on expository reading and research. Less whole language strategies, a.k.a. reader response, which focus on filtering and applying the ideas of text through the lense of personal reader experiences, are being taught, such as with dialectical journals. I’d hate to see close reading change into a passing fad (as it has before in the 1960s).

Teachers do need to pre-teach (the “into step” of reading) and/or have students pre-research the topic (if an expository close reading) or the author, context and/or genre (if a narrative close reading), especially with rigorous reading-level close readings. Having students access prior knowledge and gap-filling with our diverse learners via pre-teaching strategies (Marzano) improves comprehension and does not turn our students into teacher-dependent learners. Indeed, comprehension builds upon comprehension and enables students to independently access text. The reading research of the last sixty years is quite extensive regarding the positive impact of pre-reading strategies.

Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Study Skills close reading, close reading strategy, Common Core Standards, literary analysis, Reading Anchor Standards, reading comprehension, reading strategies, reading worksheets, text dependent questions

At the end of this article, I provide a Close Reading Expository Worksheet for you to freely download and use with the next close reading of an expository article, document, selection from a textbook, etc. You will see a few revisions to what many publishers are selling as the close reading strategy. Even a good thing can use a little tweak here or there.

As of this writing, close reading is the primary reading strategy I now see used in schools across America. Having taught for awhile as an elementary reading specialist, middle school, high school, and community college ELA teacher, I’ve seen quite a few new and improved instructional reading strategies come and go. Close reading is an old reading strategy which was re-popularized with the adoption of the Common Core State Standards back in 2009. Among other reforms, the authors argued for a move to more rigorous expository texts and less narrative texts in both elementary and secondary classrooms. The authors championed the close reading strategy as a means to help students access the meaning of text as independent readers. Additionally, the authors stressed the need for text-dependent questions to improve reading comprehension.

As is often the case when we teachers throw out the old and take on the new, we wind up impulsively replacing what has a solid research-base and worked for students with a brand new shiny wrapped package may or may not have a solid research-base and may or may not work for students.

My take is that close reading does have the solid research-base and can work for our students. However, instead of a this or that mentality, we do need to hang onto some of the old research-based strategies. What we need a mid-course correction with the close reading strategy. I’m not alone in this assessment. Noted reading researchers David Pearson (who coined the term mid-course correction for close reading), Isabel Beck, Tim Shanahan, and others such as Grant Wiggins (Understanding by Design) agree that close reading is helpful, but needs fixin’. The Close Reading Expository Worksheet which follows keeps everything good about the close reading strategy while revising what is not so good.

Now mid-course corrections can be tough to pull-off in education. I think back to the early 2000 at the heyday of the differentiated instruction (DI) movement-think conferences with 20,000 attendees, best-selling books, rock star authors, etc. As a reading specialist, I bought into so much of the DI mission, especially teaching according to individual needs. However, so much of the DI focus on multiple intelligences, learning styles, etc. was simply philosophical and certainly not research-based. I tried to re-define DI for my own teaching and books and nudge DI adherents toward assessment-based individualized instruction, keeping the wheat and discarding the chaff. Not much success with my efforts, I’m afraid to say.

Whether teachers will adopt the necessary tweaks to the close reading strategy which will prevent it from becoming just another passing fad, only time will tell. Download the Close Reading Expository Worksheet to see if this mid-course correction makes sense to you and your students.

What Needs to Change

In a related article I provide details about two necessary revisions to the close reading strategy: 1. Eliminating the prohibition on pre-reading strategies which close reading purists claim stifles reader independence. 2. Reducing the dependence on teacher-constructed, text-dependent questions to help students dig deeply into the text.

A New and Improved Close Reading Strategy (The Close Reading Expository Worksheet)

Let’s keep the three separate readings used in the close reading strategy: 1. Key Ideas and Details 2. Craft and Structure and 3. Integration of Knowledge and Ideas. Let’s keep the Think-Pair-Share, Small Group Share, and Whole Group Discussion. Let’s keep the focus on text-dependent (not unhelpful beyond-the-text personal application) questions. Let’s keep on identifying the BIG IDEA before the first read.

In addition to these strategies, let’s go back to using pre-reading activities and pre-teaching (Marzano) to improve comprehension. No educator should believe that a tabular raza (empty slate) reader is preferable to an informed reader. Comprehension builds from comprehension.  Building prior knowledge can be teacher or student-driven. A brief lecture on the subject or student research before the first reading can make all the difference in comprehension. This revision to close reading is especially important with our diverse student populations.

Let’s go back to encouraging students to develop their own text-dependent questions as they read. The reading-research actually indicates that reader self-generated questions produces greater comprehension than teacher (or publisher)-generated questions. Download my SCRIP Comprehension Strategies with posters, bookmarks, and five introductory lessons at the end of this article.

Let’s go back to a balance between reading both expository and narrative reading genre. Close readings can be highly effective in texts other than articles.

So let’s revise a good thing make it close reading a better reading strategy to develop independent readers. Interested in resources to help you do just that? Check out  the Close Reading Narrative Worksheet FREE resource download HERE. But first, download your Close Reading Narrative Worksheet below. So many free ready-to-use resources, news, and product discounts available only in the Pennington Publishing Newsletter. But first let’s download the Close Reading Expository Worksheet.

Get the Close Reading Expository Worksheet FREE Resource:

Reading, Study Skills close reading, Close Reading Article Template, Close Reading Article Worksheet, Close Reading Expository Worksheet, Close Reading Narrative Worksheet, close reading strategy, Common Core Standards, literary analysis, Reading Anchor Standards, reading comprehension, reading strategies, reading worksheets, text dependent questions