DogZilla and the Common Core

Back in the 90's when I was an elementary librarian, the remake of King Kong was released, and so I thought we'd have a little fun with Dave Pilkey's Kat Kong and DogZilla.  I had to order multiple copies and couldn't keep them on the shelf!

Here we are almost 20 years later and the remake of Godzilla brings me Deja vu.   Blow the dust off your Dogzilla and order a few more copies.  The kids will go crazy for Kat Kong and Dogzilla, the "colossal canine" again!   Let's see how this literary wonder stacks up to the Common Core measuring stick:   

Rigor... 
 'Not a very tough read. Sorry.  It doesn't take focus or sustained attention to get to the end of this lame literary gem. The Lexile, readability measure, comes in at a 720.  That is just perfect for your third and fourth graders. However, with only a few sentences on a page, we really can't call it "rigorous."  The vocabulary is what saves this book, if you are needing justification. Just look at the richly woven vocabulary from merely a handful of pages of this literary wonder: irresistible, annual, canine, crater, depths, mysterious, residents, colossal, residents, terrifying, creature, ancient,  and more!  Vocabulary is so rich that is trumps the lack of rigor.  Let the kids read!  I would never use this book in a read aloud without an activity (task as in "reader and the task") which requires the kids to think.  Define the vocabulary words ahead of time and play a vocab game after the read.  Create a bookmark with your "Cool words to make you sound smart" on it and send it home inside their checkout book.  Let the parents see the words you tried to teach them that day.  Or, look at some of the suggestions below.  

Relevance ... 

It would be a far reaching claim to believe that we could use this text to solve a real-world problem, as the CCSS encourages us to have students do. Even though the reader is asked at the end of the book... how to save the town, this is not the type of problem that the CCSS expects our students to spend a great deal of time contemplating.   Genies, dragons, gargoyles, Neptune, megalodon, and other mythical beasts are just a few other terrifying creatures that have captured literary attention many times over, but don't qualify for "real world problems" that need to be solved.  However, we could use this book as a hook to have these third graders brainstorm what we are, or should be afraid of-- or need to solve.  

Reader and the task...
I would recommend this follow-up activity to justify the use of this book:

• Gather newspapers and place them on a table(s). (Newspapers are typically above a third grade reading level, so they would qualify for a "stretch" read.)   Working collaboratively in groups,  have the children read newspapers for "real" problems or issues and contribute those to a graffiti wall.  During this endeavor, you will likely be asked meanings of words they read and you could practice decoding and finding meaning by surrounding words.  You could practice "vocabulary flooding" (synonyms) when they ask you.   You could have another graffiti wall of "new words in the neighborhood" which they could fill up as they read. The reading endeavor will likely by a close reading activity as you have given them a "reason to read."    
• Have the third graders choose a topic from their real-world problem wall to investigate.  Tell them they will be investigators and will need to dig deeply to find out about an issue and make a "claim."  Their claim will be what to do about the issue.  High School students will have no problem with this.  However,  elementary students may need some guidance or some pre-chosen texts to examine.  In fact, you could even choose primary source texts from the 1800's (or another period they are studying)  and ask them to examine what the real problems were of the time.   
• This research endeavor could lead to non-fiction reading (CCSS objectives) and text-based answers (CCSS objectives).   

So whether you are doing this with a classroom, or during your "scheduled" library time,  you can teach withstyle!   You don't have to be a classroom teacher.  If you really try this wacky-world problems unit, you are embracing some of the shifts of the Common Core.   Your students are likely to know 20 more academic vocabulary words than they did prior to reading this book.  You can build a rubric which requires them to use those words in their "claim."   This can be part of their writing or language presentation.  You could have a discussion and debate over real world issues.  What problems deserve the governmental attention the most? Kids could rank the "issues" based upon the evidence that teams present.  Which problem should be solved first?   

The creative possibilities are endless--even within the Common Core instruction.  So don't think all is lost within our new standards.  Just get to know the building blocks and embrace them.  If you were observed during a lesson like this, the principal would likely see your students concentrating on: vocabulary, building an evidence-based-claim, researching to build and present knowledge, and closely reading.  That is what separates you from a granny reading a nice book.  Plan your pedagogy.  Engage those students in reading, research, and academic vocabulary building. 

And they thought you were just checking out books...  Silly them.   

Eavesdropping Barbie a Smash Hit for Instruction!

Wow.  When I read in the Washington Post  about Mattel's new "eavesdropping Barbie," my adrenaline started to flow with the thought of instructional possibilities: Close Reading discussion and debate, seed text for research, CyberSafety, Patriot Act, Right to privacy, Bill of Rights, and more.  Just think about this Essential Question which would spark curiosity setting the stage for focused reading: 

EQ: Has technology evolved beyond its' own good?  

Guiding Questions for discussion or Text-dependent Questions: 

• How do toys reflect the culture? 
• Is there a potential for criminal activity? 
• Would the Bill of Rights have anything to do with this? 
• Would the Patriot Act have anything to do with this? 
• Has Mattel toy company exceeded "childish" things with this new Hello Barbie? 
• How does talking Barbie compare to talking Elmo? Why is it okay for Elmo to talk, but not Barbie...in this case? (This is an example of a TDQ which gets the kids to examine the text to see that it's not the talking that's the issue--but rather the listening.) 

This sample close reading piece measures a 10.5 on the Fleisch-Kincaid reading measure making it so appropriate for a great HS discussion piece.  It even has ample of great Tier 2  (SAT words) vocabulary words such as: Advocacy, advocates, affinity, subtle, vulnerable, confide, and more. If an ELA class was reading Brave New World, 1984, or some other dystopian novel, this could be paired with it to bring the material into the real world.  

 

(If you don't know how to measure readability statistics, read this blog posting: Click here )

Now we know that not everyone will be able to use this gem from the Washington Post. It is not a primary source document from the Library of Congress.  However, This is an example of using a short Close Reading piece to instigate a discussion --> which leads kids to conclude they don't know enough--> which leads to research to find the answers.  

For those people who need reading material of greater "substance" - consider pairing this with an excerpt from Chief Justice Louis Brandeis' dissenting opinion on the landmark "right to privacy" case of 1928.  Read this paragraph and see how appropriate his words were almost 100 years ago: 

• MR. JUSTICE BRANDEIS, dissenting. . . . By objections seasonably made and persistently renewed, the defendants objected to the admission of the evidence obtained by wire-tapping, on the ground that the Government’s wire-tapping constituted an unreasonable search and seizure, in violation of the Fourth Amendment; and that the use as evidence of the conversations overheard compelled the defendants to be witnesses against themselves, in violation of the Fifth Amendment.   ...."Moreover, “in the application of a constitution, our contemplation cannot be only of what has been but of what may be.” The progress of science in furnishing the Government with means of espionage is not likely to stop with wire-tapping. Ways may someday be developed by which the Government, without removing papers from secret drawers, can reproduce them in court, and by which it will be enabled to expose to a jury the most intimate occurrences of the home. Advances in the psychic and related sciences may bring means of exploring unexpressed beliefs, thoughts and emotions. “That places the liberty of every man in the hands of every petty officer” was said by James Otis of much lesser intrusions than these. To Lord Camden, a far slighter intrusion seemed “subversive of all the comforts of society.” Can it be that the Constitution affords no protection against such invasions of individual security? . . .  

After this close reading, discussion and debate, a teacher and librarian would again ask the students the Essential Question:  Has technology evolved beyond it's own good?  

Or, is technology a help or a hindrance? 

Ask your students: What else do you want to know about this?  

This is real life research. This is a life-long learning skill. This is relevant to their lives.  This fosters engagement. This is how we slowly make the paradigm shift to student-centered instruction.  Share this with a teacher who is wondering how to foster the "short term" research assignments that the CCSS says should be an "anchor standard." 

Are Your Kids Sluething or Snoozing?

For those out there in libraryland on a fixed schedule, you may be looking for "fresh" ideas to increase rigor and higher-level thought in your scheduled library time.  Despite the fact that you may be contractual "classroom coverage," you can seize every opportunity to prove you are a vital member of the instructional team-- while still valuing literature, reading, and having fun.  

Here are two examples of morphing the old paradigm of "library time" into innovative instruction in the library.  These two simple examples model adding rigor to transform an old passive "storytime" into a time for close reading, examination of the text, and discovery of meaning.  

If you really want to shock your building principal, consider asking him for the "item analysis" from annual testing, by grade level.  Tell him that you'd like to contribute to the weak areas and target a few instructional periods to address items such as inference, decoding vocabulary words, main idea and supporting details, and more.  After suggesting this once locally, I had a new librarian share that her principal looked at her in shock and said, "I've never had a librarian ask me that before."  (Instant SCORE!)

Another way to foster the "instructional partner" paradigm is to eliminate the "book exchange" from your scheduled library time.  When I was an elementary librarian (back in the Neolithic Age), all books were "returned" to the library in the mornings.  That way we reduced our library book exchange time by 5 minutes per class.  That may not sound like a great deal of time, but every 5 minutes counts. I've heard of schools where kids who want to check out a book, have to come during lunch, recess, before or after school, or with a library pass.  Every situation is different, so only you will know what works for you.  

The research says that the "more kids read the better they read.  The better they read, the more they'll comprehend.  The more they comprehend, the higher the achievement."*  Get those kids reading.  Increase your circulation.  Enlist the help of honor society students needing volunteer time.  Let them shelve your books! Increasing your instructional value is the best way to advocate for your position! 

*(Self-quote from "The Importance of Increasing the Volume of Reading" written for Expeditionary Learning, NYSED https://www.engageny.org/resource/the-importance-of-increasing-students-volume-of-reading . 'Based on the research of Marilyn Jager Adams) 

'Got AIR?

When Nike launched their "Air" brand, the word became synonymous with 'height'   and achievement --thanks to Michael Jordan.  That had nothing to do with a reading program, but perhaps we can leverage the positive association in our Acountable Independent Reading (AIR) programs.   Another acronym has been added to our educational alphabet soup.  Our state has just recommended the use of an AIR, to help close the achievement gap. 

All over the web and on great Pinterest Boards you can find reading incentive programs intended to inspire kids to read.  (Such as this one:  Click here.)  However, the growing trend, or focus, is on reading incentive programs which include: student self-assessment; student self-selection; student self-motivation;  and independent accountability.  Students however, need a framework.  They need a skeleton.  They need a plan.  They need direction, perhaps.  They need a reason.  They need a goal and more.  We librarians know that all too well.    

As a vital link to closing the achievement gap, reading has always been front in center in the elementary years.  However, all the mandates of assessment dare we say, have pushed this vital skill off its pedestal and into the background.   Programs such as RIF or 1000 books club are still as vital as they were years ago.  If you are at the elementary level, insure that your district has implemented a connection to the community if possible.  Locally, our Barnes and Noble does a book drive every holiday season towards our local 1000 book clubs.  Last year our elementary libraries received over 3000 books for their clubs, courtesy of generous B & N customers.   Contact your local bookstore to inquire whether they would do this. 

 

Thanks to Saratoga B & N for their donations! 

Pictured below are students in a local rural district holding their new "Passports to Reading"  which we recently aligned with the shifts of the CCSS to increase reading of nonfiction, spotlight vocabulary, and find meaning.   Feel free to download and print this document if you are looking for a program for summer reading or for next year.   We printed over 5000 copies of these passports for our local elementary library programs.  Kids bring them to the library weekly.    Our 'passports' were tweaked from the Macy's sponsored reading program from NYC.  Attribution is given on the back cover of our modified version.   You may find the link to this PDF, for downloading  here:  Click. 

(Photo had all parents approval for posting...) 

We realize there are "electronic versions" of rating and accountability such as GoodReads, Opals and Follett "star rating" features, etc., but there is something kids find special and novel about holding this paper booklet.  It also requires no connection at home.  

So put on your thinking caps and plan a program for this summer or for next school year!  Use this to increase your visibility.   Brainstorm any great reading incentive program for your area.  Feel free to share links or ideas below!  Here's one I found yesterday:  "Iditeread"!   Click Here.  

Metaliteracy, Megaliteracy and Information Literacy!

Last week our local colleges and universities held a conference around METALITERACY.   Transliteracy has a partner--metaliteracy.  Reaction panel member, Richard Fogarty (History, University at Albany) shared that meta means "larger" or what comes after, and that is where our conversation finds us.  After years of talking about "transliteracy," the literacy ecosystem has evolved to metaliteracy.   This is a large habitat that is not endangered. As an afternoon reaction panel member, I had the opportunity of sharing the K-12 College and Career Readiness piece of this conversation.  Whether we are working in the K-12 environment or higher education, we are all in the same boat.  The learners of the 21st Century are not those of the 1960's and our pedagogy must include adaptations.   

I created this infographic to summarize the day's conversation and encourage educators at all levels to understand this paradigm shift.  If you need to know more, follow the links on the infographic to Metaliteracy.org  or create your own local PLC to uncover and discover what this is all about and embrace this in your information literacy instruction. 

Are Your Students Sleuthing?

Detectives, investigators, criminal prosecutors and auditors all have one thing in common:  They presume guilt.   They assume there is something wrong and look for the evidence on their side. That same mode of operation should be used while "investigating" on the web. Are your students sleuthing?  

http://www.flickr.com/photos/myhobosoul/
301624376/in/photostream/

This generation enjoys criminal series, wants to study forensics, and genuinely has their interest heightened by criminal investigations.  Librarians can tap into this innate curiosity by using similar language and embracing a detective MO when searching for information.  Why not use this as a ploy to remind your students to "consider the source!"  

Another CCSS sleuthing idea we can capitalize on is to use detective riddles to compel students to read closely, re-read closely again, and re-read and discuss a detective riddle looking carefully for details.  If you examine the old Donald Sobol, Two Minute Mysteries, you will likely find a number of fine literary specimens which:

• have rich vocabulary words (SAT words)
• present intriguing detective scenarios
• provide an opportunity for reading, discussion, higher level thought, and more goals aligned with the CCSS. 

Before you know it, you have tricked your 4th, 5th, or 6th  graders into closely reading a short passage, multiple times, sleuthing for evidence in the text.  If you choose your passage carefully, they will read, discuss with their peers, and add vocabulary to their "receptive" or "productive" vocabulary. How's that idea for a 30 minute Common Core aligned library lesson.   

So when you are not "collaborating" with classroom teachers on research endeavors with Internet sleuthing, embrace the tenants of the Common Core and remember you are a teacher yourself. Package a 30 minute Common Core aligned library lesson yourself.

________________________________________________________________________________
Read Web of Deception to understand why students should be "sleuthing": click here for Google Books link (Yes, this book is older and perhaps "dated" but the premise still holds.  The mere thought of "content farms" should scare teachers into using databases.) 

Lexiles & Readability

A LOOK AT LEXILES and Text Complexity

While delivering PD yesterday,  a teacher asked me, "What's a Lexile?"   I wanted to say, "where have you been?"  But the reality is--I commend her for not being afraid to ask what we think is such a basic question.  We forget that some people have been so busy working in the trenches that they haven't been able to keep up. (They've been too busy administering tests, Student Learning Objective assessments, state exams and more.) So, listed below are the basics of LEXILES 101. 

Essential understandings: 

• The Common Core has defined where "college and career ready" (CCR) students should be reading and it's a 1450  Lexile.  Therefore, they scaffolded in reverse levels to graduate students at the appropriate level.  These Lexile levels are more difficult than where typical students are reading.
• Lexile is an algorithm. It is a mathematical assessment of a linguistic product. 
• Lexiles (and other readability statistics) are fallible. (For instance, it is not valid for prose or drama and is less valid for fiction in 1000+ Lexile range.) 
• The parent organization to the CCSS, (CCSSO formally called the Governor’s convention) recently released a white paper verifying the validity of text complexity. Therefore, we have to pay attention to this essential shift to embrace "rigor" in reading.
• To read the recent white paper from the Council of Chief State School Officers click here. This article compares a number of algorithms and the summarizes text complexity for the CCSS. 
• Text complexity formulas were meant for instructional purposes.
• Pleasure reading should be allowed at any level and this is validated in the Common Core, Appendix A, page 9, paragraph 1:

 It is very interesting, to compare the variables used among the six different "approved" complexity measures. Metametrics (Lexile) uses the simplest measure of only word count and sentence length. (Lexile.com provides a search tool for books, but many are missing.)  Other companies including Accelerated Reader (ATOS) and Pearson, DRP, etc... add additional measures of review such as punctuation, a 100,000-word vocabulary match, and more. Therefore, we would conclude that the ratings of the latter companies would be more accurate picture of complexity and appropriateness. This quote from page 17 of the white paper puts it diplomatically:

"There is no clear "gold standard" measure of text difficulty against which to compare the various metrics. Instead, we compared each metric against various reference measures based on grade level and student comprehension data for five sets of passages gathered for the study. These are defined and discussed in the sections following. Although there are limitations in the validity of these indicators as measures of text difficulty, the variety in their construction allows us to observe the robustness of the metrics and consider how different reference measures might affect their performance."

Be sure to note that Microsoft Word's Flesch-Kincaid measure has also been proven valid. This picture shows how to "turn on" readability statistics within Word:   

Readability statistics, is only one characteristic to examine for instructional materials.  Please see the charts below to identify correct grade levels and Lexiles - or level of complexity.

The Common Core has asked teachers to evaluate classroom materials for quality as well as quantity.  Complexity is only one piece of the puzzle. In addition, a teacher, librarian, or educator, has to pay attention to:

• Complexity - Lexile, vocabulary

• Qualitative measures -value
• Reader and the task -is there enough in the text to foster good discussion, value -added assignments, and begin a knowledge exploration. How can I use this novel or passage to foster critical thinking skills?

Every reading program (F and P, AR, Reading Counts, etc.) uses as its baseline, some metric to measure difficulty or "readability".

Here is a chart by Perma-bound, which correlates the different reading measures:

8 Reasons to Read in the Common Core

Read, read, read.   

It's all about reading:
The more you read, the better you read. 
The better you read, they more you comprehend. 
The more you comprehend, the greater you achieve.*
 
Therefore, our country's future is all linked to reading.  That, my friend, is why the Common Core say "literacy is everyone's business."
So why should kids read? Common Core states at least 8 reasons:

1. build and present knowledge
2. participate effectively in an evidence-based discussion
3. build background knowledge
4. gather facts to support a position
5. to enrich their lives, knowledge, and build fluency (see Appendix A p.9)
6. solve a problem
7. prepare for a discussion
8. increase knowledge

So, if you are planning a CCSS aligned lesson, you should consider reading.  However, close reading activities do not have to be "historical primary sources." They can be  sources that are vetted to be "quality" -- Remember the 3 legs of the stool:
          Quantity (Lexile, or readability measure)
          Quality (see diagram below or see a rubric)           Task (What do I want the students to DO with this passage that is worth the time).

 

So, a teacher or librarian can find captivating articles which bring subject matter to life. If your fourth graders are studying Biomes.... then find  captivating pollution articles about biomes (one pollution for each biome?) and then the task could be further research for a  "NIMBY* Campaign" for each biome, for example.
This approach: 

1. puts kids in the center of learning
2. makes the subject matter relevant to their lives
3. extends the learning experience outside of the classroom to the library for additional information, READING, and synthesis beyond the teachers' chosen 2 articles
4. requires "knowledge" evidence, synthesis or other manipulation of the facts and necessitates the NEED for the kids to read, synthesize, and apply their knowledge to the real world.  

 Now that, is aligning your instruction with the CCSS as they are... closely reading, debating, researching, writing from sources, discussing with evidence, and more.

* = Not In MY Backyard

* [Source: - Technically, I should cite this source, as  I contributed to this article for Expeditionary Learning, and used the same wording in this article which was published under their name: http://www.engageny.org/sites/default/files/resource/attachments/volumeofreading.pdf]

Cook up a Common Core lesson with this easy recipe!

Recently during PD a teacher shared she was "doing"  the Common Core.  She was just treating it as a new checklist where she:  must "do" a close reading; must "do" an evidence based writing task; etc.  Teachers often think, "If we increase rigor in our current ELA novels, we'll be aligned."  

We wish the instructional paradigm shift in the CCS was so easy.  This Millennial generation needs relevance to care and to foster motivation. The rigor is to foster intelligence.  We like to tell students that these lessons will make them....smarter, richer, and more successful in life.   

The schematic below is one good little recipe to try, if you don't know where to start.  Please note the inclusion of a research task.  This is to embrace the Writing Standards 6,7,8,9, which say students should "research to build and present knowledge."  All too often, teachers stop at the close reading task, and do not follow the "read" up with a task to make it "relevant."   Why just read a primary source or "rich text," when this could be coupled with a "short or long term research" task which gives the students an opportunity to dig deeper, conclude, synthesize, form opinions linked to evidence, and other higher-level-thought tasks.  Why not try one of these Common Core pedagogy verbs, listed below, which were taken directly from the CCS...?

• Evaluate
• Comprehend
• Critique
• Analyze - think analytically
• Address a Question
• Solve a problem
• Conduct a short research projects
• Conduct sustained research projects
• Students generate questions
• Explore a topic
• Draw evidence from texts
• Support analysis
• Research and reflection
• Gather information from print and digital sources
• Assess the credibility and accuracy of sources 
• Integrate information avoiding plagiarism
• Produce and publish writing
• Interact and collaborate
• Debate
• Write arguments to support claims
• Formulate an argument
• Comprehend
• Prepare and participate effectively in conversations. 
• Build and express persuasively
• Express information and enhance understanding 

Couple a close read together with a research task to embrace information literacy for the Information Age.   After all...30% of the PARCC assessments will be a "simulated research task."  (Or, 25% of the Smarter Balance assessments....) 

Vulcanizing a Voluminous Vocabulary

One of the CCSS shifts focuses on the direct correlation between vocabulary and comprehension.   We as educators are told to spotlight the value of vocabulary more than we ever have.   ELA teachers, librarians, linguists and wordsmiths alike have always valued "words" as they hold power: 

• Power to capture an image
• Power to express our thoughts correctly
• Power to send a message
• ...and now power to understand and comprehend...or receive a message.

If you examine the "spoken word" you will find that typically, it is void of: adjectives, prepositions, and correct grammar.  Then, we ask students to switch to writing and include:  correct grammar, punctuation, adjectives, compound sentences and lovely words...Herein lies the disconnect:

(This is based on the research of linguist Marilyn Jager Adams, Brown University -- a brilliant Phd.)   

Many educators forget that in addition to "using" the correct words to convey a message, is the ability to receive the material with a full understanding.   Research shows there is a direct correlation between reading, achievement, vocabulary and comprehension:  

• The larger one's vocabulary, the more he will comprehend.
• With greater comprehension, comes greater achievement.  
• There is a direct correlation between educated parents and the vocabulary of children.  The higher the parents' education, the greater the student's vocabulary.
• There is a direct correlation between poverty and lack of vocabulary.

So, that translates to "Every educator imperatively should understand the value of vocabulary as a direct correlation to achievement."   If you are a science teacher, you know that those "Tier 3" content-specific words are imperative to understand your subject matter.  Now we need to focus on all tiers!   

This means, all educators are in the vocab business:

What else can you add to this list?  

Click here for another good blog post on this topic.