Both chapters 4 and 5 describe the three categories of the CCSS reading standards (Key Ideas and Details, Craft and Structure, Integration of Knowledge and Ideas) in literature and informational texts. Of course, depending on your content area, you may spend more time in one chapter than the other. Here are a couple resources you may want to take a look at, if you haven't already:
- The informational reading standards that specifically spell out the standards in social studies/history and science start on page 61 of the CCSS document. If you teach a subject other than language arts, I encourage you to take a look at them if you haven’t already.
- The range of text types for literature (fiction, drama, poetry, and literary non-fiction) which will fall to language arts teachers can be found on pages 57-58 of the CCSS document.
PROMPT (Choose only one and indicate which one you have selected in your response.)
A. Reflect on these three categories in light of your content area. Which particular category will create the greatest challenge for you in your own classroom/work, and what can you specifically do to support your students in acquiring the standards associated with this particular category?
OR
B. How will increased emphasis on the reading of informational texts and its instruction (which the authors rightly suggest must occur across content areas) change your approach in the classroom and your school’s approach to meeting the challenges of “Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects”?
Your response to the prompt is due by Monday evening (2/3). Then, you are expected to revisit this site and respond to at least one of your fellow participant’s comments by Thursday, February 6. If you need help posting your comment, watch this video.
Don’t forget to read chapters 6 and 7 in anticipation of next week’s prompt.
According to Calkins, “the Common Core’s discussion of text complexity leans heavily on Reading Between the Lines, a report...that explains that when students didn’t achieve benchmark on the ACT, their struggles stemmed more from the levels of text complexity in the passages than from deficits in the specific skills called for by the questions” (32). As a result, the CCSS places emphasis on helping students to progress toward reading more complex texts.
PROMPT (Choose only one and please identify which one you've selected in your response.)
A. What “repertoire of strategies for scaffolding a reader’s work with a text that is just a mite hard for her,” do you currently employ (46)? How effective are your methods, and what evidence do you have that your methods are effective?
OR
B. What are you currently doing to assess the reading level and/or comprehension of your students? What specific evidence does your assessment give you about your students as readers? How are you using this information to accelerate student progress up the ladder of text complexity?
Responses to the prompt are due by Monday evening (1/27). Then, you are expected to revisit this site and reply to at least one of your fellow participant’s comment by Thursday, January 30. If you need help posting your comment, watch this video.
Don’t forget to read chapter 4 and 5 in anticipation of next week’s prompt.
Great responses and discussion last week! After reading chapter 2, please respond to the following prompt.
PROMPT: You may have noticed that in the Common Core standards are teachers are not instructed to guide students to “make text-to-self connections, access prior knowledge, explore personal response, and relate to [one’s] own life. In short the Common Core de-emphasizes reading as a personal act and emphasizes textual analysis” (25). With the focus squarely on textual analysis as the primary means of comprehending and interpreting texts, how might these expectations change your approaches in the classroom? What are the implications for your reading instruction?
Responses to the prompt are due by Monday evening, January 20. Then, you are expected to revisit this site and reply to at least one of your fellow participant’s comment by Thursday, January 23. If you need help posting your comment, watch this video.
Don’t forget to read chapter 3 in anticipation of next week’s prompt.
Welcome to the CCSS Book Study! We’re happy you decided to join our discussion. As you know, Washington, along with 44 other states have recently adopted the Common Core State Standards. These standards will begin to be assessed in 2014-15. You can read more about our state’s participation here. To provide a foundation and make sure we all have the same background knowledge, take a moment to read the introduction on page 3 of the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy.
While at the CCSS website, you may want to bookmark the page or make yourself a copy of the standards, as you’ll likely be referring to the standards as you participate in this book study. Please note: The ELA Literacy Standards (the focus of this book study) for 6-12 are explained in detail on pp. 34-58 of the standards document. Pages 59-64 address how those standards are applied to history/social studies, science, and technical subjects.
PROMPT: Begin your post this week by introducing yourself and telling us where and what you teach. Then post your response to the following prompt: In Chapter 1 the authors discuss how we can regard the CCSS as a curmudgeon or treat them as gold. Identify a concern and/or a reason to celebrate the adoption of the Common Core State Standards.
Your response to the prompt is due by Monday evening, January 13. Then, you are expected to revisit this site and respond to at least one of your fellow participant’s comments by Thursday, January 16. If you need help posting your comment, watch this video.
Don’t forget to read chapter 2 in anticipation of next week’s prompt which will be posted next Thursday.
