Observations from BCR Rangefinding

MSA Reading 2009

Issue / MSA Reading / Instructional Implications
Reading about Reading versus Reading / Responses continue to suggest that students know about
·  illustrations, italicized print, bulleted lists, headings
·  organizational patterns
BUT they do not apply what they know ABOUT reading to reach a deeper understanding of an unfamiliar text.
·  They have trouble connecting text features to purpose.
·  They have trouble explaining how a title can reflect an important idea or theme.
·  They struggle with explaining why a certain organizational pattern is effective.
·  They list facts and details instead of drawing conclusions or synthesizing information to reflect new learning. / Attention to
  connecting text features and organizational patterns to meaning and purpose
  generating their own questions and making connections
  applying knowledge, not just identifying or defining
  navigating a variety of unfamiliar texts independently
  supporting original interpretations with appropriate text
RF COMMENT: Students express “teacher-talk,” such as definitions of text features or literary terms, rather than their own ideas. Yes, they have to know what a text feature is, but instruction can’t stop there. Definitions and/or explanations of reading terms or concepts (like individual text features or main idea) mean nothing if a child cannot connect this knowledge to a specific piece of text in a meaningful way.
Vocabulary / Responses continue to suggest that students
  lack facility with vocabulary necessary to express ideas, forcing them to “write around” what they are unable to express with clarity and precision
  rely on nonspecific vocabulary, e.g., nice, good, etc.
  lack familiarity with SC vocabulary, e.g., conclude, conclusion, author’s opinion / Attention to
  selecting adjectives that express specific character traits, e.g., envious, considerate, brave, etc.
  clarifying thoughts orally through small- and large-group discussion
  understanding connotations as well as denotations of words, multiple-meaning words, synonyms
Cognitive Demand / Responses continue to suggest that many students
  read almost exclusively at the literal level
  struggle when asked to analyze character, setting in relationship to mood, the relationship between plot and actions of characters
  have difficulty understanding the contribution of an organizational pattern
  struggle to articulate the purpose/contribution of a text feature / Attention to
·  the level of questioning with more attention paid to questions requiring a higher level of cognitive demand
  modeling through Think-Alouds and other comprehension strategies
  use of schemas through which students can ask their own questions and analyze the ways in which they question and think about text
Issue / MSA Reading / Instructional Implications
“The Big Picture” / Many responses suggest that students remain mired in the details and never put those details together to arrive at theme, message, or purpose.
Students struggle with
  drawing conclusions rather than citing facts, details, etc.
  moving beyond superficial to more complex understanding
  comparing aspects of multiple texts or of features within a text
  using an organizational structure to support a purpose / Attention to
  understanding the difference between a conclusion and a fact/detail
  drawing conclusions, synthesizing, connecting, and analyzing
  examining connections and relationships between and among details/ideas/information in a text or across multiple texts, as appropriate
  distinguishing between a theme topic and a theme statement
  articulating literary themes rather than settling for theme topics, e.g., “Jealousy can be destructive” versus jealousy
  comparing two or more texts with a similar theme/message
  distinguishing between a theme/message and a main idea
Textual
Support / Many responses lack textual support or provide textual support that is extraneous to the assertions made or the question asked. Simply listing details from the text does not demonstrate understanding of the complexities of the text. In addition, personal responses are NOT textual support.
NEW RF TERM: “random acts of text” / Attention to
  selecting and citing effective textual support
  connecting ideas and textual support
  reading for meaning rather than skimming the text to find “the answer,” which is often inferential rather than stated
  understanding the difference between what a text says and what a text means
  expressing original ideas rather than searching for clues in the SR items
  composing oral responses to check for understanding
  paraphrasing
Personal Connections
and Formulaic Writing / Responses suggest that students continue to include personal connections/anecdotes (even in summaries).
Formulaic writing is still alive and well, although perhaps not thriving as much as it once did. / Attention to
  text-based responses
  appropriate use of personal connections that are relevant to the text and not merely expressions of prior knowledge or personal experience
Issue / MSA Reading / Instructional Implications
Critical Judgments / Many responses suggest that students do not read critically to evaluate the content and/or style of the text. / Attention to
  making and modifying predictions
  understanding how the parts of the text work together and influence each other, e.g., explaining how the setting influences characters, plot, events instead of merely describing/explaining the setting
  considering author’s purpose and/or choices
  distinguishing between important & unimportant information/details
  determining additional information and/or text features that would enhance understanding of a text
  choosing and supporting a specific stance rather than waffling between different two points of view
  critical reading with attention to both content and style
  character analysis with direct instruction on how to track literary techniques, such as mood or character development, throughout a text
Prompts / Responses continue to suggest that students are
  STILL not taking the time to understand all parts of the prompt
  starting a response without giving much thought either to the prompt or to the text
  answering only a part of the prompt
  ignoring the prompt or merely repeating the prompt / Attention to
  highlighting key words in all parts of the prompt
  paraphrasing the prompt to check for understanding of its demands
  understanding the demands of all parts of the question
  generating their own questions about a text
  using structural analysis (prefixes, suffixes, roots) to understand the words in a prompt
  working with tiered questions

Some additional comments from rangefinders:

Connections

·  Students often do not make connections among the prompt, their ideas, and the text. They seem to need more discussion in the classroom before writing a response to a prompt. They need to develop connections during reading, which will help increase their critical analysis of what was read.

·  Students would benefit from seeing more modeling of connecting ideas to textual support. Students seem to be able to answer the question and find details, but they have difficulty making connections and extensions.

·  Students need to begin by having a point to prove, something they actually want to say. Many students continue to list details without connecting those details to a larger point.

·  We saw too many “random acts of text.” Students pull information, but it doesn’t support anything. The prompt says to “use information that supports …” Teachers should model the selection of appropriate text support. Students need help in knowing what details to choose and how to connect those details to make a point. It’s a reading/thinking process, not a listing activity.

·  Teachers should model behaviors such as reading the entire question carefully, drawing conclusions rather than just repeating information, and understanding the purpose of an illustration. Students need help in these areas. How much are students discussing what they are reading?

Fostering Growth in Thinking

·  Students should be afforded opportunities to respond to BCRs in formats other than written, e.g., charts, diagrams, etc. Maybe these formats would help students discuss their responses, since they’re not written in paragraph form.

·  Students need opportunities to track their thinking during reading and to discuss their thinking frequently.

·  Reading is more than answering questions. Reading instruction should help develop a child’s thinking. Students would benefit from more opportunities for read-alouds, discussions, and modeling connections. READ/THINK/READ/THINK

·  Explain, explain, explain! Connect, connect, connect! Extend, extend, extend!

·  Teachers and students should discuss text on a regular basis so students can gain confidence in their own thinking.

·  As I read response after response, I began to feel that, in class, students are just answering BCR after BCR without instruction in the skills it takes to respond well.

·  We sense that kids are thinking more than their responses show. Teachers must continue to model, instruct, and practice reading as a process, not a formula.

Moving Beyond Literal Understanding: From What to Why

·  Students are stuck at the literal level; they need to do more interpretation of what they are reading. For example, students need practice in interpreting figurative language, not just identifying it.

·  Drawing conclusions is not simply citing information already in the text.

·  Students know what quotation marks are, but they do not know why an author might want to include direct quotations in an informational text.

·  Many students confuse summarizing with retelling and get bogged down in minute details instead of concentrating on the important points.

·  Students struggled when comparing across a text or between texts. Often, they just wrote a summary when a summary was not required. I think students need to work more with paired texts.

·  Many students seem to be closing in on the “3,” but they just don’t take that extra step that will help them get to complexity.

·  When asked about the author’s/text’s message, students gravitated toward a directly-stated main idea which was a more literal interpretation of the message.

·  Students need to develop a generalization as it relates to a question. Students often begin to compose a response without having a point to prove or write about.

·  Students have little understanding of the organizational structures of text as they relate to meaning. Both identifying and using organizational structures was difficult.

·  Students often miss the big picture because they do not synthesize information to arrive at the overall ideas in the text.

·  When asked why an author used a particular word or phrase, students often explained or defined the word, which doesn’t really answer the question.

·  Students have shown growth in analyzing literature using literary terminology. BUT throwing the terms into an answer without text support does not significantly help a response.

·  Students often tell stories rather than give explanations.

·  Students lack command of vocabulary to express a character’s feelings and/or traits, which often prevents students from demonstrating a full understanding.

·  Students would benefit from the use of paraphrasing while summarizing; many students are not using paraphrase at all.

·  Students do not seem to understand that setting goes beyond just time and place. They don’t seem to know the difference between action and setting in creating mood.

Miscellaneous

·  Many students seemed to concentrate on formulaic process rather than thinking about the text in a more holistic way. We felt like we were still seeing too much ACE and RARE.

·  We noticed a lot of repetition in student responses. Many responses imply formulas: ASI, ACE, AEE. Formulas do not help students uncover text complexities.

·  Our group felt that we could see evidence of strategy instruction and “out of the box” thinking. We did not see as many formulaic responses as we expected. Also, there was rich vocabulary in many of the responses that we read.

·  Personal connections are often irrelevant and demonstrate little more than a superficial understanding of the text.

·  Students need to look at graphics, introductions, etc. -- the entire passage. When working with text features, students need to understand that headings include titles and subtitles.

·  Repeating the prompt takes up crucial answer space and adds nothing to the response.

·  It would be great if students just answered the question!

·  Some students need help with understanding some key vocabulary terms: whether, passage, compare

Note: These observations and suggestions span all six grades tested on MSA Reading. Any implementation of suggestions must be done in an age- and grade-appropriate manner.

MSDE.9/2009 1