Six Pieces of Advice on Teaching with Complex Text

Thank you. I look to you and Rasinski as the experts on reading and rereading. I did a Periscope on this exact topic, Standard 10, last Friday. Sounds like I'm right on track with everything you said here. I would love your feedback. https://ktch.tv/8x63
Jen Jones (www.helloliteracy.com

3/21/16

To be clear, Dr. Shanahan, all of this important teaching with increased text complexity comes AFTER learning how to decode in K-2, where students should be receiving systematic, explicit phonics instruction and reading highly decodable texts that align to the skills being taught. Of course, K-2 should also be using rich read-alouds, etc., to build vocabulary and oral language skills. Right???

3/26/16

Lit Research in Practice--

Right... partly right, that is. Most of the studies that have been done with this seem to have focused on second-graders and they found that kids could learn as much or more with the more complex texts than the reading level ones. So, we are in agreement that PreK, K, and Grade 1 readers are not appropriate targets for more complex text... and we agree on the reason for this.. they need to develop decoding skills. However, by the time kids reach what we have called a second-grade reading level, there is no excuse for ducking more complex text. (One more disagreement: K-2 students do not learn much vocabulary from reading instruction, mainly because the books are usually designed to stay well within their range of vocabulary development. In fact, most experts (e.g., Beck, Biemiller) who focus on early vocabulary development turn not to the reading books, but to books that will be read to the children).

thanks.

3/26/16

We do agree on the 2nd grade point, given that students have had adequate instructional opportunity in the code prior to 2nd grade. In schools, I find that although the research indicates 2nd grade as the time we can bump up text complexity, schools are not always so efficient in getting that decoding work done by the first day 2nd grade, so there is some blur into that year.

We also agree on the last point of your reply. You'll notice that I said "rich read-alouds" in my original comment, referring to teachers reading to children higher-quality literature than the "reading books," which offers more opportunities to build vocabulary.

3/26/16

You have presented a lot of factors to consider when selecting and instructing texts for students to read. I have a colleague who is teaching letter sounds and blends to 8th grade students. Her rationale is that this is what they need. However, what they really need is to be able to read and comprehend the level of text that are presented in the textbook as well district and state level assessments. Her intentions are great, but the students in her remedial reading class aren't advancing.
I like the concept of rereading the text. So often teachers read a text or a passage for a lesson,and not refer back to the text. Students who initially grasped all elements are good, but students who struggle with comprehension are now going to operate from a deficit. The student is unable to discuss the text or complete the assignment.
Thank you for bluntly stating, "there isn't a formula to match texts". As a novice reading teacher learning how to perform in the role, that statement alone is a great guide for lesson planning and instruction.

3/28/16

Lequone--
The percentage of kids likely to require letter sounds and blends at Grade 8 is pretty small. There are some such students, but not many. I think the guidance I'm suggesting is likely more in line with what you actually face as a teacher. Thanks.

tim

3/28/16

This post gives me so many new ideas to ponder about reading instruction. Within the six tips are a few ideas that conflict with what I have read before and used as part of my practice. First, the idea that matching students to instructional level is not necessary brings a brand new approach to delivering reading content. I have spent many years assessing students and leveling text in attempt to deliver the most individualized instruction and materials. Of course, I understand that this does not apply to K-2 (as identified in discussions on this blog), but I have always thought matching texts was a key element of a balanced literacy program. I am excited at the idea that we don’t have to limit our older readers to specific texts, but instead we can provide flexibility and support, depending on the demand of the reading task. This is exciting new information!
Another mind opening statement in this blog is about the idea of giving more help when the task has become more challenging. It makes compete sense to ask teachers why we focus most of our support when the text is simple and easily decoded. Our efforts should be focused on when the reading material becomes harder for the reader. I appreciate these statements to challenge what I already know about effective reading instruction.
Finally, I applaud the reminder to have reading happen in a variety of disciplines. Reading across the curriculum is an excellent and meaningful practices. Integrating reading into all subject areas and having students practice reading regularly throughout the day is a logical way to improve students’ skills.
I value the new ideas this blog post gave me about approaches to effective reading instruction. Thank you for sharing your current research and theory.

3/28/16

This post gives me so many new ideas to ponder about reading instruction. Within the six tips are a few ideas that conflict with what I have read before and used as part of my practice. First, the idea that matching students to instructional level is not necessary brings a brand new approach to delivering reading content. I have spent many years assessing students and leveling text in attempt to deliver the most individualized instruction and materials. Of course, I understand that this does not apply to K-2 (as identified in discussions on this blog), but I have always thought matching texts was a key element of a balanced literacy program. I am excited at the idea that we don’t have to limit our older readers to specific texts, but instead we can provide flexibility and support, depending on the demand of the reading task. This is exciting new information!
Another mind opening statement in this blog is about the idea of giving more help when the task has become more challenging. It makes compete sense to ask teachers why we focus most of our support when the text is simple and easily decoded. Our efforts should be focused on when the reading material becomes harder for the reader. I appreciate these statements to challenge what I already know about effective reading instruction.
Finally, I applaud the reminder to have reading happen in a variety of disciplines. Reading across the curriculum is an excellent and meaningful practices. Integrating reading into all subject areas and having students practice reading regularly throughout the day is a logical way to improve students’ skills.
I value the new ideas this blog post gave me about approaches to effective reading instruction. Thank you for sharing your current research and theory.

3/28/16

This post gives me so many new ideas to ponder about reading instruction. Within the six tips are a few ideas that conflict with what I have read before and used as part of my practice. First, the idea that matching students to instructional level is not necessary brings a brand new approach to delivering reading content. I have spent many years assessing students and leveling text in attempt to deliver the most individualized instruction and materials. Of course, I understand that this does not apply to K-2 (as identified in discussions on this blog), but I have always thought matching texts was a key element of a balanced literacy program. I am excited at the idea that we don’t have to limit our older readers to specific texts, but instead we can provide flexibility and support, depending on the demand of the reading task. This is exciting new information!
Another mind opening statement in this blog is about the idea of giving more help when the task has become more challenging. It makes compete sense to ask teachers why we focus most of our support when the text is simple and easily decoded. Our efforts should be focused on when the reading material becomes harder for the reader. I appreciate these statements to challenge what I already know about effective reading instruction.
Finally, I applaud the reminder to have reading happen in a variety of disciplines. Reading across the curriculum is an excellent and meaningful practices. Integrating reading into all subject areas and having students practice reading regularly throughout the day is a logical way to improve students’ skills.
I value the new ideas this blog post gave me about approaches to effective reading instruction. Thank you for sharing your current research and theory.

3/28/16

Katy, I agree whole-heartedly with highlighting this: "First, the idea that matching students to instructional level is not necessary brings a brand new approach to delivering reading content".

It is truly liberating to stop trying to 'match' the texts to the 'reading ability' of each child - but to match your teaching technique according to the circumstances of use of the texts.

If, for example, the teacher, rightly, ensures that reading takes place across the curriculum, it is not always possible to find a subject-specific text which can 'match' the reading capacity of all the children - but the children can access the book at their own level and the teacher can support accordingly.

The only proviso is when teachers are providing books for younger readers, beginners or strugglers who have yet to master the alphabetic code well enough to read their individual 'reading books' independently. In that case, the teacher can provide independent reading books on the basis of cumulative and decodable to 'match' the alphabetic code taught to date. This is an entirely different set of circumstances and generally refers to the 'beginner's' reading material - not class material.

Even such beginners can access texts beyond their actual decoding ability with support from the teacher - for example, the teacher reads to the children, or shares the reading with support as necessary.

3/29/16

I really appreciate this article. I have been thinking about this a lot with my students with disabilities. Recently by our school administrators we have been told that we should be reading, reading, and reading in class with our students. Until this statement about a month ago, we have been guilty of not doing that or cutting that out. If we do read with the class it may be just the teacher reading something aloud. Like I said earlier, with this happening in my co-teaching classroom I have been very worried about my students with disabilities when it comes to testing. I can see the thought process of a general education teacher that it may take too much time for students with disabilities to read harder text and I should just read it to them, but I do not agree with that. I think that it is very important that we set aside time everyday just for our students to read. Like you stated I also think it is important for students to read material that is on their level, above their level, and even below their level. Even though this is not easy for students and it may be time consuming for teachers it is important that all students get that experience reading that difficulty of text. Thank you for the tips! They are really helpful for my students that are reading below grade level.

4/9/16