Literacy Now

I embraced online sites and social networks years ago. However, when it came to my classes in children’s and YA literature, I resisted the move from face-to-face (FTF) to online courses. Instead, I used a hybrid approach with some FTF meetings and others done with online courseware. As the hours spent in FTF meetings dwindled from 45 to 30 to 15 to 8 and finally to 4, I was determined to build a reading community online that would mimic what I could do in a traditional classroom. The basis for my crafting an online community was to consider what elements any community of readers shared. The key aspects of community for me were three:

1. I had to create a CORE list of books we would all read and discuss;
2. I had to CONNECT my students with one another despite our separation; and
3. I had to initiate meaningful CONVERSATION about books.

The first step was simple enough. I used the social networks to ask for recommendations of books that teachers and librarians who work with school aged students should know. I certainly had some criteria: diversity in genre and formats and forms and protagonists, older titles as well as newer ones, and literary as well as appealing.

Lists are, even with input from others, idiosyncratic: they do reflect me; I am keenly aware that they may not all appeal to the members of the class. Therefore, I do an activity my colleague Chris Crowe does with his students. At the end of the semester, I have the students rank the books from their most favorite all the way down to their least favorite. After I collect all of these rankings, I tally them. The books with the highest numbers are the least favorites from the class. Conversely, the books with the lowest totals are the favorites. Amazingly, there is not much that separates the top choices from the bottom rankings. I share this with the students so that they might realize that their LEAST favorite book was someone’s MOST favorite book and vice versa. This activity has never resulted in a book being replaced on the core list.

That is not to say the core is static, as every semester I replace two to three titles. New books migrate to the list because they represent some significant change in literature. For instance, when AMERICAN BORN CHINESE became the first graphic novel to win a Printz Honor Medal, it was added to the list. Other GNs have joined the list as this format continues to evolve.

The second step is a bit trickier. How can we connect with one another even though miles separate us? How can we get to know one another in an online forum? One assignment seems to connect us all as readers (and since this is a graduate level class, most students do come into the class as readers). It was an assignment I did more than 20 years ago when I took YA literature from Dick Abrahamson. In turn, it was an assignment he, too, had completed for YA literature: the reading autobiography. I invite students to tell me about their road to lifelong reading (and, for the most part, no one enters this program without a passion for reading being in place). What are their earliest memories of reading? What was reading like in elementary school? How did they learn to read? What did they read in adolescence? In college? As an adult? Students have the option of writing a traditional narrative or constructing some sort of visual (prezis, reading timelines, infographics).

As we share our journeys, two things become clear: there are certain experiences that seem to connect those who loved reading early on, and not everyone’s journey has been an easy one. The experiences that connect those of us who are lifelong readers mirror those in Carlsen and Sherrill’s (NCTE, 1988) VOICES OF READERS: HOW WE COME TO LOVE BOOKS. They include experience such as the following:

• Having someone read aloud
• Having access to books in the home
• Being able to select books to read (choice)
• Talking with someone else who has read the book

It becomes readily apparent that, while many of us read different books along the path to lifelong reading, there were some shared titles—especially a love for reading serially. The series students loved varied depending on the age of the student, but series and reading serially was commonplace.

As for the students whose journeys were more arduous, there were still commonalities. Many of my graduate students are second language learners; they struggled to learn how to read in English when they were in school (and think of what they bring to those students who are also struggling with the same task). Books were not readily accessible in their homes; libraries were not always welcoming places or were not close enough to the neighborhoods where they could be accessed. Poverty played a significant role. Seeing these similarities and differences engages students in some meaningful conversations about how their experiences will be brought to bear within the school library. Connections are being made.

Promulgating meaningful discussion of books could be dicey. I did not want this discussion to devolve into dissection, but I do want the discussion to go beyond the surface. Having students interact in online forums is much like group work in a traditional classroom: it is possible for one person to dominate and for someone to sort of fade into the background. I opted to eschew the Discussion Board portion of the course software. Instead, I am using some new apps for book reading and discussion.

p: ctkmcmillan via photopin cc

One of these is SUBTEXT, an app for the iPad (I am using this with students who have these devices already). Subtext allows a group to read a book and annotate it as they read. They can pose questions, make comments and predictions, and even share URLs and other information they link to the text. Edmodo, another app, permits interaction as well.

While it might be due in part to the Hawthorne Effect, I am seeing much more active participation and much less echoing of the comments of other students. Some of the conversation about book centers on being able to identify those salient qualities that separate a book from a piece of literature, good books from great books. Therefore, students apply criteria and evaluate books in whatever approach works best (charts, PowerPoints, Animoto, etc.). They also create bibliographies such as “If you loved ______, then you might like these books.” In other words, they are creating real world documents, the types of documents they will use as school librarians.

This conversation is critical. Even more crucial is that the conversation extends beyond our class. So, students join in #titletalk, a monthly Twitter chat where books and ideas are exchanged in a fast-paced hour of talk using only 140 characters. Here my students are able to connect with teachers and librarians and authors and publishers from all over the United States.

I will be presenting a session on building community in an online environment as part of a panel including Donalyn Miller and Terry Thompson, classroom teachers. The session, “Scaffolding Students’ Independence and Teachers’ Professional Development through Authentic Reading Communities,” is scheduled for Saturday, April 20, from 11:00AM–1:45PM. Communities increase the reading done by students, help them make connections with other readers, and challenge readers to branch out.

Teri is also moderating the author panel, “‘And Then What Happens?’ The Enduring Appeal of Series Fiction,” at IRA’s 58th Annual Convention, April 19-22, 2013, in San Antonio, Texas. The panel features Tom Angleberger (Origami Yoda series), Laurie Friedman (Mallory McDonald series), Annie Barrows (Ivy + Bean series), and Ellis Weiner (Templeton Twins series). Want more? Come see Teri when she presents the IRA Special Interest Group (SIG) session, “Celebrating Books and Reading: How Teachers Make a Difference.”

Teri Lesesne (last name rhymes with insane) is a professor at Sam Houston State University where she teaches classes in children's and YA literature. She is the author of three professional books and numerous columns, articles, and reviews. Currently, she is Executive Director of ALAN and serving on the BFYA Committee of YALSA.



I Hadn’t Thought of That! Guidelines for Providing Online Feedback That Motivates Students to Learn [member login required]

Harnessing the Educational Power of Twitter

p: RachelEllen

The Eskimos have 52 words for snow because it is so special to them; there ought to be as many for love. —Margaret Atwood

We tried to talk it over, but the words got in the way. —Leon Russell

Margaret Atwood is right, of course. We could communicate more effectively with more words to describe different kinds of love. But having just one word is infinitely better than none.

Words, despite their limitations, help us talk about topics we would not otherwise be able to discuss, and see things we would not otherwise be able to see. A word is a candle held up in the darkness to help us move forward.

Words might be humanity’s greatest invention. A common vocabulary helps us share emotions, share ideas, learn, grow. And this is just as true in conversation in schools as it is in conversations at home.

An important common vocabulary in schools, as Phil Schlechty has explained, could be developed around student engagement. Teachers can have meaningful conversations defining and acting on the terms authentic engagement, strategic compliance, and off-task behavior. And once the words are defined, teachers can share ideas and strategies to increase authentic engagement.

Educators can also benefit from coming to a shared understanding of positive reinforcement, and defining such ideas as growth mindset, ratio of interaction, and positivity. When people develop clear definitions of positive and negative reinforcements, they begin to see interactions in a clearer way in the classroom. Some words make the invisible, visible.

Powerful professional learning also happens when teachers agree about the meaning of other words, such as those describing reading strategies, like text-to-self or summarizing, or writing concepts such as sentence fluency, coherence, or voice. The simple act of talking about a word like voice, and working to develop a shared, deeper understanding, can be very meaningful professional development.

Teachers, of course, are not the only people who need to develop a shared vocabulary. When administrators do not share with teachers a common vocabulary about the meaning and importance of observations, their evaluations have little positive impact on teaching and learning. What good is an administrator’s evaluation when the teacher and administrator can’t authentically talk about what was observed? Worse, what good are observations when observers can’t clearly define what they are seeing?

A clear picture of reality is an essential part of growth, but the picture does have to be clear, and people need a shared understanding if they are going to talk about it.

Students should also be a part of developing a shared vocabulary. When students understand authentic engagement and strategic compliance, they can give meaningful feedback to their teachers on what works and what doesn’t work for them. Sandi Silbernagel, for example, a teacher in Slidell, Louisiana, learns a lot by asking her second graders for their feedback on their level of engagement.

No doubt Leon Russell was right. Sometimes the words can get in the way. But without words we can’t talk. Language is the means by which communication takes place.

And as in life, so in schools. We should do all we can to develop a shared vocabulary. When we can truly talk about what we see, important learning—for teachers, administrators, and students—can really happen.

Jim Knight is a researcher and writer. His books include HIGH-IMPACT INSTRUCTION (2013), UNMISTAKABLE IMPACT (2011), and INSTRUCTIONAL COACHING (2007). He also writes the Radical Learners blog and posts on Twitter @jimknight99. You can reach him at jimknight@mac.com.



Language is Our Heritage, But Will it be Our Legacy?

Kids Must Taste Academic Fun!

As an elementary school teacher in Texas, it is difficult to know that the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) even exist, never mind that they are dominating schools, conversations, news, and professional development around the nation. Out of curiosity, I asked my colleagues if they were aware that all but five states (one being Texas) were in the process of implementing the CCSS. The majority were unaware that these standards had even been developed.

However, all agreed that they felt like it would eventually be a disadvantage for both students and educators in Texas to not take part in the adoption of the CCSS. The main reason for this concern is the idea that our educational standards in Texas may not be as challenging as those that students are being held to in other states. As a result, we may or may not be preparing students for success outside of the state upon graduation.

Teachers also feel at a disadvantage simply because they are not aware of what education is like in other states, what is being taught, the materials that are being used, or of the strategies and methods that are common. Although the CCSS does not currently impact educators or students in Texas, it will likely some day in the future.

So, why am I aware of the CCSS? Simple—I used to teach in the Northeast. Upon arriving in Texas, I was immediately aware of (and shocked by) the vast differences in the education systems from state to state. Texas schools are much more grade-oriented, beginning at an early age. This continues to be a difficult adjustment for me because my previous experience focused on a more standards-based educational foundation, which was designed to meet students where they are at. As a result, I try to keep up to date with what is going on in the rest of the country regarding trends in education.

I am also currently pursuing my Master’s degree in reading and language arts, and recently started blogging about teaching ideas, which keeps me connected to other teachers outside of the state. Having been in Texas for the past three years, I had only briefly reviewed the CCSS. In my mind, if the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) are just as rigorous as the CCSS, then why not adopt the new standards and collaborate with the rest of the nation?

Since Texas is a large state, finding materials that match the TEKS is not difficult for teachers. The textbook companies will continue to develop editions solely for Texas. Reading basals and other textbooks are written to specifically align with the TEKS for use in Texas school districts. The TEKS are actually listed in teacher’s manuals and all materials have the distinctive Texas Edition label. While teaching in the Northeast, we spent a great amount of time analyzing textbooks for their alignment to state standards. Often, it was determined that some material was extraneous while other resources were created to supplement the teaching of standards that were not addressed sufficiently. Textbooks and materials that align with the CCSS are already being adopted. Smaller states would not have had the luxury of abstaining and remain able to obtain adequate materials.

In addition, many Texas school districts use an online curriculum management system called CSCOPE. CSCOPE is directly aligned with the TEKS and provides a curriculum calendar for each subject and grade level, as well as materials and lessons. Some school districts require teachers to teach lessons explicitly from CSCOPE, thereby reducing the need for additional resources. However, since the concepts are generally the same, resources found online and from teacher resource stores which cater to the CCSS can be adapted for use by teachers in Texas, provided the focus is on the skill being targeted rather than the grade level in which it is taught.

p: mikerastiello via photopin cc

Professional development in Texas is offered locally through regional education service centers, which develop training based on trends in the state. While it is advantageous to have teachers in Texas educated in the same way, it may pose a challenge since, unbeknownst to many Texas teachers, the pedagogical techniques are not necessarily aligned with the trends in the rest of the country. As time goes on and other states unite over the CCSS, this gap is likely to widen.

Even more concerning is that Texas will not be involved with the development or implementation of a standardized test to match the CCSS. Texas recently implemented its new STAAR test last year. By administering a different assessment than the remainder of the country, it will be difficult to compare results and determine whether the educational system in Texas is on par with the rest of the nation. This possibly puts Texas students at risk for being underprepared for colleges or the workforce outside of the state.

As an educator in Texas, I worry that we may be missing out on some of the advantages of the CCSS—particularly, the commonality of the common core.

This spring, the International Reading Association Annual Convention will be held in San Antonio, Texas. Since educators from all around the country will be in attendance, it is likely the CCSS will dominate sessions and discussions. However, this will likely make many Texas educators feel left out of the loop.

Personally, I am looking forward to attending the conference to find out what are the hot topics in education outside of the state as well as to gain some insight on the CCSS and whether or not they are comparable to the educational standards in Texas. There are many authors whose materials I read that I plan to attend their session, whether Common Core focused or not. Hearing Richard Allington speak about getting all readers up to grade level is beneficial for any educator, regardless of the state standards.

Jessica Goodrow is a second grade teacher in Texas. She previously taught first grade in Connecticut before relocating. She is currently working on obtaining her Master's degree in reading and language arts from the University of Texas at Arlington.

p: Ambient Photography

There have been many articles about the Common Core that have highlighted frustrations about new standards that will greatly increase the amount of nonfiction students will be asked to read. One blog entry even implied that the Common Core is disrespecting fiction titles and trying to pass off wood chipping manuals as nonfiction.

These characterizations are not particularly helpful in the grand scheme of things. In the national conversation, the nonfiction in question is repeatedly referred to as “informational texts,” a label that immediately bathes the genre in an unflattering light and exacerbates the misconception that upping the nonfiction ante will be a negative thing.

Indeed, the term “informational text” conjures images of dry, fact-filled tomes that pale in comparison to the fiction educators are wont to give up. Compound this imagery with comparisons that pit a suggested reading of “Executive Order 13423: Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management,” published by the General Services Administration to, perhaps, E.L. Doctorow’s RAGTIME, and it will not be terribly difficult to muster support for those who seem to be against reading more nonfiction.

While it is true that Common Core will open the door to a broader range of texts, this type of warped comparison is creating fear as well as giving nonfiction short shrift and, more importantly, it is skewing the conversation in general.

It is imperative to understand that the intention behind the Common Core is to recognize that part of what is needed is knowledge, as knowledge is part of what informs literacy. This misconception that Common Core exists to take away the literature naysayers love—and by literature they mean fiction—has people really riled up. Instead, a benefit of what Common Core is doing is broadening what we commonly think of as literature. The kind of nonfiction that challenges a student’s thinking and expands their views of the world is most definitely literature.

In part, it is the list of Common Core titles that keeps circulating that is contributing to the conflict. The list includes award-winning narrative nonfiction as well as historical documents and can seem constricting. What would be more useful than a list of texts would be a list of qualities of a nonfiction text that make it beneficial to readers and learners for providing them not only with information but avenues of critical thinking, placing people and episodes of history in context so readers can better understand how our world was, and is being, shaped. Marc Aronson, an author and teacher at Rutgers who has led more than 20 Common Core workshops for teachers and librarians is working with the people at Student Achievement Partners to effect this change.

Since I am an author of narrative nonfiction, this may make me biased; however, my colleagues and I are in a unique position of experiencing first-hand how excited students become when reading and analyzing nonfiction texts that challenge and encourage them to dissect meaning for themselves. We write books that make kids think about what is being presented, and question things for themselves. This is evidenced during school visits, as well as in letters and emails from kids asking wonderful questions of authors.

The implementation of Common Core is an excellent step toward preparing our students to be more critical thinkers, able to form intelligent opinions and solve problems. Of course, it is also a work in progress and there will be glitches along the way that need to be refined. To this end, rather than restricting teachers and librarians by supplying them with a list of titles to utilize, the idea of a list of qualities would be a vast improvement.

In the meantime, I am offering teachers some useful ways to connect the CCSS to my two new books—COURAGE HAS NO COLOR, THE TRUE STORY OF THE TRIPLE NICKLES: AMERICA’S FIRST BLACK PARATROOPERS (ages 10 and up with more than 100 photographs/Candlewick Press) and WHO SAYS WOMEN CAN’T BE DOCTORS? THE STORY OF ELIZABETH BLACKWELL (picture book, illustrated by Marjorie Priceman/Henry Holt).

For COURAGE HAS NO COLOR, Lynn Rutan wrote a wonderful Teacher’s Guide, which is being made available in its entirety here. It includes Discussion Questions as well as Writing Prompts and Research Activities with Common Core Connections. For WHO SAYS WOMEN CAN’T BE DOCTORS? I am currently working on a guide that will be available soon and do similar things.

The author of more than ninety books for young readers, Tanya Lee Stone graduated from Oberlin College, worked as an editor of nonfiction books, and earned a master's degree in science education. She moved to Vermont in 1996, wrote her first book, and has been writing ever since. In addition to her two new books—COURAGE HAS NO COLOR and WHO SAYS WOMEN CAN'T BE DOCTORS?—Stone's books include ALMOST ASTRONAUTS, ELIZABETH LEADS THE WAY, SANDY'S CIRCUS, UP CLOSE: ELLA FITZGERALD, and A BAD BOY CAN BE GOOD FOR A GIRL. She also has a forthcoming picture book about Jane Addams called THE HOUSE THAT JANE BUILT. Tanya has received many awards for her work, including a BOSTON GLOBE-HORN BOOK Honor, YALSA Excellence in Nonfiction Finalist, an Orbis Pictus Honor, a Jane Addams Honor, a Flora Stieglitz Straus Award, a Golden Kite Award, and a Robert F. Sibert Medal. She teaches Writing Creative Nonfiction and Writing Children’s Literature at Champlain College.



The Common Core: Showing Nonfiction the Love

Book Reviews: Social Justice

The Common Core State Standards are on everyone’s mind these days. For me, the positive impact of the standards so far has been a renewed interest in how we improve writing instruction in every classroom, at every grade, and in every content area. It’s hard work, and I welcome the energetic, enthusiastic national dialogue about writing.

To begin with, there is a harsh reality to address: What we’re doing in writing instruction now isn’t working. CCSS or not, changes need to be made. According to The Nation’s Report Card (NAEP, 2012), only 27 percent of eighth graders are proficient in writing and, of those students, only 3 percent are advanced. Consider the bigger number: 73 percent of eighth grades are not proficient. And the results for grade 12 are starkly similar: 24 percent proficient and 3 percent advanced. No improvement in four years? I’m sure you will agree that these statistics are dismal and simply not okay by anyone’s measure.

The implications are huge: Everything we do in writing must be examined for its effectiveness. All of our writing cards need to go on the table, and those that are not producing desired results should be discarded in favor of those that are. Five-paragraph essays, Friday spelling tests, out-of-context word practice, excessive prompted writing¾these are the types of practices that need to be rethought. In their place we should use methods that support many different learning styles, teach spelling skills in a variety of ways (using student writing for practice instead of worksheets), balance prompted writing with self-chosen topics, and so on. In other words, we should use best practices—or what I like to call, the 4Ws.

• Writing process: the recursive steps writers go through to generate text
• Writing traits: the language used to assess and teach writing
• Writing modes: the purposes for writing
• Writing workshop: the structure of the writing classroom

These are quick, thumbnail definitions, of course. But my point is that the effective teacher of writing embraces all four of the Ws, not just one or two—and there is a world of studies and reports that supports this claim: Writing Next, Because Writing Matters, Writing Now, Informing Writing, The Neglected R, among others. Years of well-documented research reveal why certain methods work better than others, but sadly, for many of today’s students, their writing education looks similar to students’ of past generations, with few if any Ws.

Writing instruction has been slow to change, in some measure due to its inherent complexity. It is, after all, thinking aloud on paper, and there is nothing easy about that. But it is possible to embrace that complexity and teach writing well, if we choose to. I believe students need diverse and multi-faceted teaching that focuses on how each of the 4Ws can help them improve. They need opportunities to apply the writing process (draft, edit, revise) extended pieces of writing over time. This work takes place in the writing workshop structure in which teachers conduct focus lessons (or mini-lessons), and students choose topics and work uninterrupted on their pieces, conferring with the teacher as needs arise. Trait-specific focus lessons develop specific, targeted skills, one at a time, so students learn how to revise and edit their work and take it to the next level. And, students’ longer, more extended pieces should rotate between the three modes of writing¾narrative, expository, and persuasive¾so they explore full range of purposes for writing. Each of the 4Ws adds substance to the writing classroom—and when we unite them, the whole becomes much greater than the parts.

So where do the CCSS fit into this long view of writing reform? The standards spell out what students should know and be able to do, grade by grade. The 4Ws are how we move students toward meeting them. As we explore the standards and their implications on teaching, see if you don’t agree that they clearly establish the need for the 4Ws to be fully operational in classrooms at every level and in every subject. The four categories of standards for writing are:

Text Types and Purposes
These standards focus on the modes of writing: expository, narrative, and persuasive (argumentative). They also address the different formats (structures) and genres (categories) of writing so students become knowledgeable of and adept at many aspects of writing.

Production and Distribution of Writing
These standards focus on the writing process. Revising (traits: Ideas, Organization, Word Choice, Voice, Sentence Fluency), editing (trait: Conventions), and publishing work using technology (trait: presentation) are key to improving writing over time.

Research to Build and Present Knowledge
These standards focus on writing to learn. Gathering information from multiple sources to express ideas, provide evidence, and support positions in the modes of writing: narrative, expository, and persuasive (argumentative) make this standard critical to the writing students do throughout their lives.

Range of Writing
This standard focuses on short- and long-term writing projects. Quick writes, short essays, journal entries, and responses to literature are but a few examples of short pieces. Longer, extended projects that last over several weeks in a writing workshop setting are equally important. They allow students to apply all steps in the writing process, confer with the teacher, and create multiple drafts before publishing a final copy.

p: ghm575 via photopin cc

Once again, this may be a simplistic interpretation of the standards, but you can see where I’m going with how the standards and 4Ws are inextricably linked. I believe the standards will be met in classrooms that apply the 4Ws. As educators everywhere tee up to meet the CCSS, let’s remember, “The Standards define what all students are expected to know and be able to do, not how teachers should teach” (CCSS 2010, p. 7). My advice: Work backwards from the big picture of what students should know and be able to do in writing, and each day zero in on best practices based on the 4Ws. Then and only then will students meet the CCSS—and as students succeed, we may discover the joy of teaching writing, too.

See Ruth Culham at IRA’s 58th Annual Convention in San Antonio, Texas, where she will be part of the Invited Symposium, “Readin', Writin', and 'Rithmetic: Revisited Through the Common Core State Standards and Texas STAAR.” Her co-presenters include Greg Tang, Steven Layne, and Danny Brassell. Learn more at www.iraconvention.org.

Ruth Culham is the recognized expert in the traits of writing field and author of over 40 teaching resources published by Scholastic, including 6+1 TRAITS OF WRITING: THE COMPLETE GUIDE, GRADES 3 AND UP; 6+1 TRAITS OF WRITING: THE COMPLETE GUIDE FOR THE PRIMARY GRADES; and TRAITS OF WRITING: THE COMPLETE GUIDE FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL, winner of the 2011 Teacher's Choice award. As the author of TRAITS WRITING: THE COMPLETE WRITING PROGRAM FOR GRADES K-8 (2012), she has launched a writing revolution. TRAITS WRITING is the culmination of 40 years of educational experience, research, practice, and passion.



Top Literacy Experts to Discuss New Standards at IRA Convention

Teaching Tips: The Reading Makeover