Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

Common Core Connections Elizabeth S. Moeller North Carolina State University

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

Introduction As the first year of the implementation of the Common Core State Standards draws to a close, it is evident across our country that the standards are challenging for educators to implement and challenging for students to master. The greatest challenges within the newly designed standards are related to the three instructional shifts in English Language Arts. The first shift focuses on students building knowledge through content - rich nonfiction and informational texts, thus emphasizing the importance of students learning from what they read. The second shift relates to students providing evidence from the text in their reading and writing, thus emphasizing the significance of students providing text dependent answers. The third shift defines the importance of students interacting with complex texts and the academic vocabulary within the text. The three instructional shifts pose a great challenge for educators and their students. As an educator of young students, it is my goal to embrace the three instructional shifts. By doing so, I will be able to implement rigorous and relevant instruction that will challenge my students and ensure that they are on the path to being College and Career Ready. Throughout the current school year, I have implemented innovative instructional strategies that have allowed me to begin to meet the demands of the three instructional shifts in English Language Arts. As a lifelong learner, it was my goal to reflect on my newly developed understanding of literacy theories and models and the three instructional shifts in order to design a literacy lesson that met the demands of the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts. Below is a reflection of my understanding of literacy theories and models, as well as a summary of my experience and challenges related to raising the rigor in my literacy instruction.

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

Frequently Used Literacy Theories At the beginning of the semester, I was unaware of how the various literacy theories and models impacted my instructional decision making in English Language Arts. My newly developed knowledge and understanding of literacy theories and models has allowed me to identify how Schema Theory and the social learning perspective of Social Constructivism drive the way that I design and implement my literacy instruction. Over the past four years, I have utilized what theorists and researchers refer to as the Schema Theory to design and implement meaningful learning opportunities for my young students. Because each child comes into my classroom with unique experiences and beliefs, I believe that the Schema Theory must be a key component to my instructional design. According the Schema Theory, "people organize everything that they know into schemata, or knowledge structures" as a means to aid their understanding (Tracey and Morrow, 2012, p. 62). As an educator, it is very important for me to recognize that each students schemata is "individualized," thus greatly influencing their learning (Tracey and Morrow, 2012, p.62). Additionally, I must understand that "knowledge structures are pliant and expandable," meaning that students are always learning and refining their schemata (Tracey and Morrow, 2012, p.62). According to theorists and researchers there are three processes through which knowledge structures change: accretation, tuning, and restructuring (Tracey and Morrow, 2012, p.62). In my classroom, I utilize the Schema Theory on a daily basis, which allows me to observe the processes of accretation, tuning, and restructuring among my students. For example, prior to reading and analyzing a literary text, I ask my students to identify their background knowledge through many different vehicles, such as Admit Slips or Anticipation Guides. This allows me to identify what my students already know about a certain topic, as well as their misconceptions about a topic.

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

With this information, I can refine my instructional plan to better meet the individual learning needs of my students and build their schemata. As students engage in the reading process they "actively construct and revise their schemata," which leads to successful text comprehension (Tracey and Morrow, 2012, p.64). Throughout the reading of a text, my students are constantly reflecting on their background knowledge, checking for misconceptions and actively constructing new meaning. This is evidence of how the process of tuning and restructuring takes place among my students, and how knowledge structures are consistently changing among individuals. I have found that by incorporating the Schema Theory into my instruction, I am able to better prepare my students for successful text comprehension. It is my goal as an educator to enhance the quality of schema that students possess so that they can better comprehend complex texts. As a classroom teacher, I also utilize what theorists and researchers call Social Constructivism to facilitate student learning in my classroom. Lev Vygotsky, the theorist responsible for Social Constructivism, believed that "children learn as a result of their social interactions with others" (Tracey and Morrow, 2012, p.127). In my classroom, it is clear that I value this belief because I consistently design my instruction so that my students will have meaningful opportunities to interact with their peers and build their understanding. For example, when my students participate in collaborative learning activities such as Reading Groups, they have the opportunity to read, analyze, and discuss a text with their peers. It is important to note that I do not organize my Reading Groups based on ability, as it is my goal for my students to interact and learn from their peers with different levels of ability. Another influential concept within Vygotsky's Social Constructivism is the "zone of proximal development," or the level "at which children can be successful with appropriate support" (Tracey and Morrow, 2012,

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

p.128). As an educator, I firmly believe in the idea of the zone of proximal development, and that children should be provided with the opportunity to learn at their individual level. In my classroom, the zone of proximal development correlates with how I differentiate my instruction to meet the individual learning needs of my students. In my classroom, I differentiate instruction based on the content, process, and products of learning. For example, I incorporate reading materials at varying readability levels in order to meet the instructional needs of the students in my classroom. Additionally, I integrate tiered activities into my instruction so that my students are engaged in learning the same concepts and skills, but proceed with varying levels of support and complexity. Another influential concept within Vygotsky's Social Constructivism is scaffolding. According to Tracey and Morrow (2012), "scaffolding refers to the assistance that adults and more competent peers provide during learning episodes" (p.128). I use scaffolding on a daily basis throughout my instruction in all content areas to ensure that I am meeting the diverse learning needs of the students in my classroom. For example, prior to reading a text with a group of students, I scaffold my students understanding by activating prior knowledge and introducing new vocabulary terms. While reading the text, I periodically stop and model my thought process for my students by thinking aloud. This helps my students learn to monitor their thinking as they read which ultimately improves their reading comprehension. The theory of Social Constructivism allows me as a teacher to create collaborative learning opportunities for my students as well as a learning environment that is differentiated to meet the individual learning needs of each student. Introduction of New Theory It is clear that the Schema Theory and Social Constructivism have played a significant role in how I design and implement my literacy instruction. My newly developed knowledge of

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

literacy theories and models has encouraged me to broaden my instructional approach in order to incorporate the Constructivist Reader Response Theory. As a Language Arts teacher, I never considered the significance of the Reader Response Theory in relation to my literacy instruction. However, it is now clear to me that the Reader Response Theory correlates with my belief in the Schema Theory. According to Louise Rosenblatt, "all readers have individualized reading experiences because each reader has unique background schemata" that contribute to their understanding of a text (Tracey and Morrow, 2012, p.65). Because each child comes into my classroom with unique schemata, I must recognize that their reading experience will be individualized as well. Another key component of the Reader Response Theory is the two distinctive responses that students have to text: efferent and aesthetic. As a literacy teacher, it is critical for me to understand that "the purposes for reading informational texts and reading literature are very different," and therefore the responses that I elicit from my students must be very different as well (Tracey and Morrow, 2012, p.66). When designing a lesson around an expository text, I have learned to focus on eliciting efferent, or fact based responses from my students. When designing a lesson using literature, I have learned to focus on eliciting aesthetic, or personal and emotional responses from my students. In my Common Core Connections literacy lesson, I focused on promoting efferent responses from my students because they were reading a complex informational text, and thus reading to learn. For example, while reading the text Giant Pandas by Kira Freed, I asked my students "What characteristics of a baby panda make it vulnerable to predators?" and "What was the author's purpose for writing the section titled Food and Feeding?" The answers that my students provided me with illustrated that they were able to read for meaning and explain their understanding with evidence from the text. More importantly, the questions that I created and

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

the answers that my students gave allowed me to clarify my understanding of the two distinct responses that students have to texts. My newly developed understanding of the Reader Response Theory and the two different responses that students have to texts will play a significant role in how I design and implement my literacy instruction for years to come. Text Selection and Lesson Design Prior to implementing my Common Core Connections literacy lesson, I spent quality time analyzing the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts. By doing so, I was able to identify the main objective that I wanted my students to explore throughout the tiered lesson. According to the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts, my students would be engaged in a lesson in which they were to identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe. To assess my students understanding of the objective, I integrated an innovative technology tool into my Culminating Activity. Using VoiceThread, my students were able to comment on selected portions of each text and illustrate what the author was trying to answer, explain, or describe. The combination of the two objectives gave my students the opportunity to engage in a meaningful literacy lesson that contributed to their overall understanding of informational text. After selecting the learning objective, I was faced with the difficult task of selecting two complex informational texts. To begin, I reflected on the content that I was currently teaching. Because my literacy instruction was related to China, I chose two complex informational texts on Giant Pandas. I felt that the two informational texts would refine my students schema about giant pandas and encourage my students to provide efferent responses based on the reading. The first text that I selected was Giant Pandas, by Kira Freed. The text Giant Pandas has a Lexile Level of 601 - 650, and a Developmental Reading Assessment Level of 28. Both quantitative measures

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

indicated that the text Giant Pandas was ideal for second grade students. After quantitatively measuring the text, I began to reflect on some qualitative measures for text complexity. I believe that the text is considerate for readers because "there are a number of text features" that the author used to facilitate comprehension and learning (Fisher, Frey, and Lapp, 2012, p.43). Additionally, I believe that the text is considerate for readers because of the coherence of the text. The author explicitly states the main idea of each section of the text, thus contributing to my students ability to understand the information. Finally, I believe that the text Giant Pandas was appropriate for my intended audience because the material in the text matched my students "probably background and prior knowledge" of panda bears (Fisher et al., 2012, p.44). The second text that I selected increased in text complexity tremendously. The text Giant Pandas by Gail Gibbons has a Lexile Level of NC860, and a Developmental Reading Assessment Level of 38. Both quantitative measures indicated that the text Giant Pandas would be challenging for second grade students to read independently. After qualitatively measuring the text, I reflected on the qualitative measures that made the text more or less difficult to understand. I believe that the text was more complex for my students because it did not have explicit text features to aid in their understanding. Additionally, I believe that the text was more complex due to the sentence structure throughout the text. However, I do believe that the text was a considerate text to use with my students because my students acquired background knowledge in the previous text that would allow them to better understand the text. The text was considerate for my intended audience because the author was able to "introduce new content by making connections with what the reader already knows" (Fisher et al., 2012, p.44). Although the second text was increasingly difficult for my students, I felt that the staircase of increasingly text complexity that

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

I chose for my lesson was appropriate for my audience and contributed to their challenges and successes throughout the lesson. One of the greatest challenges within the Three Instructional Shifts in English Language Arts relates to students providing evidence from the text in their reading and writing. Although I believe that my students have had great success with this task throughout the school year, it continues to be one of my greatest challenges as an educator. Included in the tables below are the text dependent questions that I crafted for my two - tiered literacy lesson. The text dependent questions, like the texts, increased in complexity throughout the lesson.

Table 1 Text Dependent Questions Giant Pandas, by Kira Freed Describe what makes a panda "easily recognizable" in the wild. What is bamboo? Explain why it is important to the giant pandas diet. What is the author's purpose for writing the section titled "Food and Feeding?" What characteristics of a baby panda make it vulnerable to predators? What might happen to a panda cub that does not stay close to its mother during the first years of its life? Describe the signs that giant pandas use to mark their territory. What is the author's purpose for using a diagram to identify the size of a giant panda? Explain why giant pandas are in danger of becoming extinct. What is the author's purpose for writing the section titled "Giant Panda Survival?" Table 2 Text Dependent Questions Giant Pandas, by Gail Gibbons What is the author's purpose for using a map? What do the different colors show? Why did the author use the word "poor" to describe the giant pandas eyesight? What words did the author use to describe the sounds that a giant panda makes? Compare and contrast a bark and a squeal. When might a giant panda use these two sounds? If a giant panda was walking in the woods and heard a rustle, what sense would the giant panda use? What is another way that giant pandas communicate? Explain why the author used the word "occasionally" when describe the giant pandas diet. The author states that the cubs "cry sounds like a human baby." What is being compared here? Explain why the author used the word "helpless" to describe a cub. It is important to note that I chose to implement my Common Core Connections literacy lesson with a mixed ability group of six students. I chose a mixed ability group because I wanted

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

10

to expose each student, regardless of ability, to the complex texts and the rigorous text dependent questions. Because I chose a mixed ability group, I had to scaffold my instruction in many different areas. Prior to beginning each text, I introduced selected vocabulary words from the text to my students. After showing my students the word, I was able to elicit responses from them regarding what the word meant. During this time, I noticed that my higher level students were successful in defining the word while my lower level students had more difficulty. However, I was able to show the students the word in the text and in the glossary, which led to a whole group discussion about the words meaning. This led to each of my students understanding the meaning of the word in the text. Additionally, throughout each read aloud, I provided assistance to my lower level students by providing them with Show Me The Evidence sentence starters to help them better respond to the text dependent questions. Show Me The Evidence sentence starters include stems such as, "Based on what I read," and "According to the text." Throughout each read aloud, I reminded my students to reference the Show Me The Evidence sentence starters prior to sharing their response with the group. I found that the sentence starters helped my students reflect on their thinking and provide evidence from the text in their responses. Reflecting on the implementation of the lesson, it is clear that the scaffolding or assistance that I provided to my students increased their ability to better understand the meaning of the two complex texts. Reflection on Student Learning Following the implementation of the Common Core Connections lesson, I was able to reflect on the challenges and successes related to my instruction and student learning. It is important to note that I incorporated the Schema Theory in my two - tiered lesson as a means to explore my students prior knowledge related to the topic. Reflecting on the Admit Slips that my

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

11

students completed as a pre - assessment, it was clear that each student had prior knowledge about giant pandas. Prior to reading the selected texts, my students completed a KWL Plus chart as a group, which allowed me to identify their misconceptions about giant pandas. Following each read aloud, my students revised the KWL Plus chart to reflect what they learned as well as their misconceptions. These activities allowed me to recognize how young learners actively construct and revise their schema as they learn to incorporate new information. Additionally, because I designed my lesson based on the Reader Response Theory, I found that my students were able to obtain facts from the text and provide efferent responses to the text based questions that I asked. Throughout the two - tiered lesson, my students were able to successfully support their understanding with specific evidence from the text with prompting and support. Because I had to continually prompt my students to use specific evidence from the text, I believe that it was a challenge for them. While my students have had vast amounts of practice with this throughout the school year, I believe that they often provide an answer prior to reflecting on their thinking and the evidence in the text. This is an essential skill that I will continue to work on with my students as the school year progresses. Following the implementation of each lesson, my students completed a variety of activities to demonstrate their comprehension of the text. After reading the text Giant Pandas by Kira Freed, each student completed a nonfiction graphic organizer in which they identified three things that they learned, two interesting facts, and one question that they had after reading the text. Reflecting on the students responses to this activity, it is clear that my students were able to articulate their understanding of the text. Additionally, as a culmination activity to the two - tiered lesson, my students utilized an innovative technology tool to demonstrate their understanding of the author's purpose for writing each text. Using VoiceThread and a short selection of text, my students identified what the author of the text was

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

12

trying to explain with evidence from the text. Reflecting on my students responses, it is clear that they mastered the objective for the two - tiered lesson. In conclusion, by incorporating the Schema Theory and the Reader Response Theory into my instruction, as well as the variety of extended activities, my students were able to successfully interact with two complex texts that refined their schema about giant pandas and their ability to answer text dependent questions. Literacy Theories and the Common Core State Standards: A Correlation As the first year of the implementation of the Common Core State Standards draws to a close, I continue to reflect on the relationship between literacy theories and models and the Common Core State Standards. The rigorous and relevant English Language Arts Standards emphasize the importance for students to prove their thinking and understanding with textual evidence. As Fisher and Frey described, "the architects of the Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts are challenging" students to use "explicit and implicit information for the text to support reasoning" (2012, p.70). As I reflect on my experience implementing the Common Core State Standards, it is clear that this has been a challenging task for me to teach my students and for my students to master. However, by integrating the Reader Response Theory into my literacy instruction, I was able to "balance the reader and the text so that each is involved in the transaction of reading" (Fisher and Frey, 2012, p.73). This allowed me to teach my students how to actively construct meaning from the text as well as how to read texts for different purposes, which leads to greater comprehension of the text. Specifically, my students were able to "read carefully and produce evidence in their verbal and written responses," that demonstrated their understanding (Fisher and Frey, 2012, p.70). By incorporating the Reader Response Theory into my instruction, my students were able to successfully meet the expectations of the Common Core State Standards addressed. I found that my students

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

13

comprehension of the text allowed them to identify the main purpose of the text, including what the author wanted to answer, explain or describe. Insights Gained: A Reflection Reflecting on the experience that I had implementing the Common Core Connections lesson, it is clear that I was able to learn invaluable information about myself as an educator, my students, and the Three Instructional Shifts in English Language Arts. As an educator, I learned that I must analyze a text using both quantitative and qualitative measures. This way, I can ensure that the text is appropriate for my intended audience. Additionally, I learned that instead of reading a text in its entirety with my students, I should select only a few pages, or a short passage to read. This will allow for a close reading of the text in which my students and I can analyze the structure and meaning of the text carefully. By doing this, my students will develop a habit of critical thinking that is essential to their future success as students and citizens in our global community. I also learned the significance of utilizing the Reader Response Theory as a vehicle for my instruction. This will allow me to plan my instruction carefully in order to elicit efferent or aesthetic responses from my students. Because it is increasingly important that my students have a balanced literacy diet of fiction and informational text, I believe the Reader Response Theory will continue to play a major role in my instructional design. Throughout the lesson, I learned that my students are motivated and determined learners that are capable of meeting and exceeding my expectations for them. At the beginning of the school year, I thought that my students would be unable to meet the expectations of the Common Core State Standards. However, like most children do, they proved me wrong. Over the course of the school year, my students have been actively engaged in reading complex fiction and

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

14

informational texts. Throughout each reading, my students have been able to support their thinking and understanding with evidence from the text. The Common Core Connections lesson was no different. My students were able to showcase their talents as developing readers and critical thinkers. I am very proud of my students for the progress that they have made this school year and the challenges that they have overcome related to the Common Core State Standards. The Three Instructional Shifts in English Language Arts pose a great challenge for educators and their students. As an educator of young students, it was my goal to embrace the three instructional shifts within my Common Core Connections lesson. Reflecting on my experience, it is increasingly clear that the shifts are challenging for educators to teach and challenging for students to master. However, I believe that as I continue my quest as a lifelong learner, I will be able to effectively incorporate the three shifts into my instruction in order to ensure that all of my students are on the path to being College and Career Ready.

Common Core Connections, Elizabeth Moeller

15

References Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2012). Text - dependent questions. Principal Leadership, 70-73. Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2012). Text complexity: Raising rigor in reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors. Tracey, D.H., & Morrow, L.M. (2012). Lenses on reading: An introduction to theories and models. New York: The Guilford Press.