More than Text Complexity: Supporting Text Alignment

As we delve into Common Core some of you may have noticed a nefarious problem lurking beneath several literacy lessons.  As we stress text complexity and the Common Core standards, we need to take the time to ask one simple question, "Does the text match the instructional objective?"

Even before the Common Core standards became a curriculum driver, the issue of text alignment has been an issue.  Too often, both administrators and teachers assume that any standard can be taught with any text. This could not be further from the truth.

Imagine learning about cause and effect, but there is only one example of cause and effect in a two or three page article.  Can you imagine the confusion, the off-topic discussions, and outright incorrect answers that students will be giving? And then, there is the judgement that the students have an issue with reading texts because the targeted skill actually does not appear in the text, or, that the teacher's instruction does not help students grasp skills.

When selecting texts, text complexity is only one consideration, and I would say that it should not be the first consideration.  Readability and text complexity can easily be judged by doing a copy and paste into a word processing document.  Text alignment cannot.

Text alignment requires that the teacher select an article that matches the targeted instructional objective, that matches content objectives, and that is engaging enough to help students learn.  This can be a tall order, and, to be honest, I often wrote or patched together articles for my own classes to save myself from what can be an arduous search.

So, when I support teachers in looking for texts or evaluating texts, I give these guidelines:

1.  Check the titles and subheadings; pay attention to genre and text purpose.  Most textbooks are expository texts that are written with explicit meaning.    They are great for teaching things like BASIC chronological order and BASIC cause and effect.  They are not great for more complex understandings.  I, personally, preferred articles and encourage teachers to use articles over textbooks because they provide more flexibility.

If you are trying to teach argumentation, the title should clearly be an argument.  If you are trying to cause and effect, the title should clearly indicate that it is about cause and effect.  The sub-headings will help you understand how the text is organized.  This level of clarity is a hallmark of disciplinary writing.

2.  Make sure there are 5-7 examples of your target standard/objective available in the text.  You need enough exemplars that students have something to find.  If they can't find it, they will start making stuff up because they assume that if the teacher gave them the reading, it must be there.  This is the "Emperor's New Clothes" of literacy-based lessons.

You have to read the text, mark your example, and understand what miscues are present before you give it to students.  Additionally, you must be prepared that everyone's interpretation of the text will not be the same (that's why textual evidence is so important).  Having multiple exemplars deepens the discussion and can help the class come to consensus.

You also have to know how to divide the text up - the worst thing is to send kids into a jigsaw when their assigned texts only has part of the information that they need.  Knowing the text prior to class will build in this flexibility.

3.  Determine whether the text gets to the skill by being explicit, generalizable, or inferential?  This tells you WHEN you can use the text.  It is painful to see kids struggle with an inference that has to be developed over multiple paragraphs when they are just learning a skill.  This also goes to text complexity.

Explicit texts should be used for introductory instruction.  Explicit mixed with some generalizable and/or inferential for intermediate instruction, and a text that is totally inferential (philosophy is often like this) should be saved for advanced instruction (like AP or IB courses or when students have demonstrated the ability to grasp this level of text).

Generalization and inferential texts require scaffolding as students learn to deal with them and cannot be given without explicit instruction of how to deal with them.

4.  Create a reading prompt.  The reading prompt should give a brief overview of the article(s).  It should explicitly state the skill that students are learning and practicing, and it should state the specific steps that they should use in reading the text.  

This will ensure that your texts are aligned to your objective and help you see any possible gaps that you might need to address in planning or instruction.

NOTE: You should provide 2-3 strategies that students can choose and use when reading the text.  A strategy is only a strategy when it is used to solve a problem; otherwise, it is your instructional activity.  This means that students have to choose, not you.

What alignment advice are you giving teachers?  Has anyone tackled this issue head on in their school?