The strategies in this chapter represent engaging ways to read and work with the many texts found in science classrooms in order to increase reading comprehension.
Being able to read and comprehend informational text is a skill all students will need in life. Science classrooms provide opportunities to incorporate informational text into lessons. Reading can provide an opportunity for students to build background knowledge around new content. It can also help to extend knowledge after labs and other interactive activities.
The strategies highlighted in this section involve active learning and interaction among students. Additionally, the strategies can give students a purpose for their reading and maintain student engagement. All of the strategies require students to interact with the text multiple times, which can result in an increased understanding, especially of more complex texts.
Studies have shown that literacy is a key factor in student achievement in science (Education Endowment Foundation, 2017).
Comprehending complex informational text is a challenge for many students. The use of reading strategies during multiple readings of the text can assist with comprehension (Frey & Fisher, 2013, pp. 57–58).
The strategies shared in this chapter use the skills of thinking critically and communicating effectively. Students may think critically when they engage with a text multiple times for a given purpose. We rarely read a text in our classes without discussing it orally or in writing, which also helps students build communication skills.
Reading informational text for details and arguments is also an essential part of the Next Generation Science Standards. This requirement is embedded throughout many of the standards in every grade level (Achieve, Inc., 2017a).
Many of the strategies mentioned in this chapter reinforce the Next Generation Science Standards' crosscutting concepts (National Science Teaching Association [NSTA], n.d.). For example, the crosscutting concept of Systems and System Models requires students to understand how organized groups of objects are related to one another. Students deepen their understanding of systems when they complete various graphic organizers, which we explain in this chapter.
We highlight four strategies for incorporating reading into science classrooms: close reading, graphic organizers, 4 × 4, and jigsaw.
Close reading is a strategy we use with complex texts. According to the Common Core Standards, the complexity of a text is determined by three things: (1) qualitative factors, such as levels of meaning, structure, and background knowledge required; (2) quantitative factors, which include grade level, lexile level, and overall measurable readability; and (3) reader and task factors, which consider reader motivation and experience, as well as purpose for reading (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2019a, 2019b, 2019c). As we expose our students to increasingly complex texts, we need to provide effective strategies they can use to understand them.
Close reading can help students increase their comprehension and application of text because it requires a deeper dive into text to determine purpose, analyze meaning, and make inferences (Dakin, 2013, pp. 56–57). Note that you will not find the term “close reading” in the Common Core Standards; however, it is commonly used to describe the process we discuss in this section.
Our process of close reading starts with choosing a complex text and developing text-dependent questions. Next, we help students gain text annotation skills through multiple readings. Then, students are guided to use textual evidence to support their answers to the text-dependent questions. Finally, we show students how to put it all together through the steps of a “close read.”
When we plan for a close reading activity, we first find rich text (one that is complex and will build a deeper understanding) on a science concept. The text does not need to be an entire article. We have found that it works best if it is no longer than a page for younger readers and no more than two pages for older students. It could be an even smaller section of the text containing details we want to emphasize with students.
We next write text-dependent questions. These questions require students to return to the text to find not just the answer, but also evidence to support their response. Text-dependent questions should not ask students for simple facts, but, instead, require them to make inferences (educated guesses based on the text and background experiences) or draw conclusions. See Table 8.1 Examples of Text-Dependent Questions and Non-Text-Dependent Questions for concrete examples. Using text-dependent questions is a key part of meeting the English Language Arts Common Core standards at all levels (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2010, p. 7).
Before we can begin to follow the close reading process, we must first teach students what it means to annotate the text. Annotations are an essential part of close reading because they allow students to focus more deeply on a text (Fisher & Frey, 2013, p. 1). See Figure 8.1: Annotations, for the ones we use in our classrooms. They include noting unfamiliar words or phrases, writing questions, and making connections.
Table 8.1 Examples of Text-Dependent Questions and Non-Text-Dependent Questions
Examples of text-dependent questions | Examples of non-text-dependent questions |
Based on what the paleontologist found at the dig site, what can we guess about the people who used to live there? | Was what the paleontologist found at the dig site interesting to you? |
Using the article, explain why some people want to go to space. | Do you want to go to space? |
The author discusses differences of living on Earth versus in space. What details are used to show this? | Based on the movies you've seen, what is one difference between living on Earth and living in space? |
To teach these annotating strategies, we usually go through a text paragraph-by-paragraph with the students. We start by modeling this process through a think aloud, explaining why we are using each annotation. Figure 8.2: Annotations Model Think Aloud Example shows our annotations and the “think aloud” comments we shared with the class (seen in bold). Then, we have students work with a partner to annotate the next paragraph and ask a few to share what they wrote with the entire class. We find that students may favor one annotation and generally only use that one. For example, they may feel comfortable underlining important ideas, but don't use many of the other annotations. To increase their usage of other annotations, we specifically model how to use the “less popular ones.”
Once we have practiced the annotations with students, we also take time to model what it looks like to use textual evidence when answering text-dependent questions. We start by explaining why these questions require textual evidence and how the questions are different than others they may see elsewhere. We tell students that these types of questions usually do not ask for their opinions and will require them to understand the text. Text-dependent questions are important because they reinforce the idea of rereading something to ensure comprehension and reveal ideas students may have missed. We further explain that as they grow older, in either the workplace or college, they will need to have a more complete understanding of topics before engaging in important discussions or completing work.
We then model how to answer text-dependent questions by using the following process:
When first writing with textual evidence, it can be helpful to provide students with sentence stems to get them started. Our favorite stems include:
Once we model the process of answering text-dependent questions, we provide students with examples of questions and appropriate responses. For example, after reading an article about the history of how an intellectual chain reaction (one scientist has an idea that causes other scientists to have additional ideas) discovered fission and how fission itself is another type of chain reaction, we asked our students this text-dependent question: “Which of the two chain reactions in the article is the most important in today's world?” See Figure 8.3: Example of a Text-Dependent Question and Answer for an example of a student's answer. After reading and annotating the text, she made the decision that intellectual chain reactions were more important than fission. Her answer includes a quote regarding Albert Einstein's research that she chose as evidence to support her opinion.
The close reading process we like to follow is:
Graphic organizers are tools that help students visually organize information. Research has found that they are effective in helping students identify and recall main ideas from their reading and may increase comprehension (Manoli & Papadopoulou, 2012, p. 351). There are various types of graphic organizers that can be used in all subject areas, but in science class, our favorites are Venn Diagrams, Cause and Effect Organizers, and Concept Maps.
Venn Diagrams are used to compare and contrast two concepts, while Cause and Effect graphic organizers illustrate how causes lead to specific effects. Concept Maps show how concepts are related to each other.
Here are some specific examples of how we use these graphic organizers in our classes:
Students can also use Venn Diagrams, Cause and Effect Graphic Organizers, or Concept Maps to capture notes and reference while they are performing research. Students can also refer to their graphic organizers in preparation for assessments and writing projects.
See the Technology Connections section for online resources that offer free “blank” graphic organizers.
The 4 × 4 reading strategy we like requires students to read a text four times for four different purposes.
We start planning a 4 × 4 activity by choosing four topics that could be discussed within an article. For example, after teaching students the drawbacks of nuclear power plants, we have them read an article entitled “The Benefits of Nuclear Power.” Four topics from the article that can be discussed are:
After we find the article and identify the four topics, we follow these steps during the lesson:
For difficult or long texts, students can rotate through the four topics more than one time. Also, the time limits can be flexible.
We provide an example of a completed 4 × 4 board in Figure 8.12: 4 × 4, which is a student-completed example for the Benefits of Nuclear Power.
Students subsequently have a small group discussion answering the following four standard questions, as well as deciding on a spokesperson:
In addition, we usually include a fifth question that is specific to the article's content. In this case, it might be “Why do cities choose to use nuclear power?”
They document the answers to these five questions on the backside of their 4 × 4 paper or article. We then discuss the answers as a class. We begin with the first question and have the spokesperson from each group share out their group's answer. All students have the opportunity to alter their answers based on reports from the other groups.
We love this technique because it allows students to read the text multiple times and work together to expand their understanding.
To extend this particular activity, students could follow the same steps while reading another text about the negative effects of nuclear power. Then, they can take a position and defend it using evidence from the readings either in writing or in an oral debate. This can be done for two sides of any topic using this process. Chapter 10: Strategies for Discussions includes resources for holding a friendly classroom debate.
If class size doesn't permit an even division of four students per group, this activity also works well with three students. Each student still reads the article four times and adds their comments to each of the four sections. And, they still benefit from the five questions they discuss after the activity, just like a group of four would. The only difference is that when the activity is complete, their four sections will have only three details from the article instead of four.
Jigsaw reading is another strategy we often use in our classes. It requires each student to become an expert in one section of a text. They then teach what they learned to other students who have become experts on different portions of the text. Research has shown that the jigsaw technique can increase engagement and student learning (Tewksbury, n.d.).
To use the jigsaw method, we first divide the text into sections based on concepts or natural breaking points. We attempt to make each section about the same length. However, in order to differentiate for ELL students or students with reading challenges, we often create more accessible sections of text for them (see the “Differentiation for Diverse Learners” section for ideas on how to “engineer” texts to increase their accessibility).
Once we have sectioned the text, the steps are as follows:
We've often found it helps to have directions up on the board while students are using Jigsaw. Figure 8.13: Jigsaw Instructions is a list of instructions we put on the screen in our rooms and reveal one by one as we are going through the process.
In order to “amplify the text” instead of simplifying it, we often take the same text and “engineer it” to increase its accessibility (Billings & Walqui, n.d.). We can “engineer” it by:
For example, if we have an eight-paragraph article, we would break it down into sections of one to two paragraphs with a heading based on the topic of the smaller section. We would also add definitions for any unfamiliar vocabulary words, as well as a focus question for each section. Adding in white space can allow for students to write notes in the text while reading. These steps make longer texts more accessible to students who may have reading challenges.
Some students, however, may require alternative or modified texts. While we want students to feel challenged, we do not want to frustrate them. We will either find a similar text at a lower reading level or only ask them to focus on specific sections. Another tool we have found that is helpful is called Rewordify, https://rewordify.com. This website instructs teachers to place their chosen text into a box and then it will simplify the language. See the Technology Connections section for more online resources.
When using graphic organizers, students who may have difficulty writing can be given premade copies to fill in. We also draw out Concept Maps ahead of time for students who may need the extra help and just have students fill in labels as we go over them.
To help readers facing challenges or ELL students, we often give them the text the day before we read it in class so they can preview it. If available, we can also provide ELL students with the text in their home language (see the Technology Connections section for resources). Another idea for these students is finding videos (in English or in their home language) that are related to the content in the text. The students view the videos prior to the lesson to build necessary background knowledge (see the Technology Connections section for suggested resources).
While we find close reading to be an excellent strategy for deeper learning, it can take the fun out of reading if used too often. When Mandi first learned of the strategy, she used it several weeks in a row on all texts read in class before realizing the student grumblings were due to her overuse. Reading a text over and over again can begin to get monotonous for students and teachers and is not necessary with all texts. We would suggest that—at most—close reading be used once per month.
When looking for articles and other science texts, there are many online resources out there. One of our favorites is Newsela: www.newsela.com, which allows you to search by science content, provides multiple written texts, different lexile levels, and contains text-dependent questions. On Newsela, teachers can also set up classes (at a cost) for their students to join and they can access the text and questions online, which is useful practice for online assessments.
Another favorite is CommonLit; www.commonlit.com. While CommonLit is more English-content focused, there are also articles based on science topics. This website allows teachers to create classes and select texts based on lexile levels that come with text-dependent questions.
More options for texts can be found on Larry Ferlazzo's Websites of the Day Blog, “The Best Places to Get the ‘Same’ Text Written for Different ‘Levels’”: http://larryferlazzo.edublogs.org/2014/11/16/the-best-places-to-get-the-same-text-written-for-different-levels.
Resources for finding texts and videos in multiple languages can be found at “The Best Multilingual & Bilingual Sites for Math, Social, Studies, & Science”: http://larryferlazzo.edublogs.org/2008/10/03/the-best-multilingual-bilingual-sites-for-math-social-studies-science.
For resources to find blank graphic organizers, visit “The Best List of Mindmapping, Flow Chart Tools, & Graphic Organizers”: http://larryferlazzo.edublogs.org/2009/02/09/not-the-best-but-a-list-of-mindmapping-flow-chart-tools-graphic-organizers.
Thank you to Brianna Miller, who allowed her Venn Diagram to be used.
Thank you to Kaden Neal, Jodi Peterson, Dominic Pedretti, and Conner Anderson for the picture of their 4 × 4 on the benefits of nuclear power.
Thank you to Irelyn Humphries, who allowed us to include her answer to a text-dependent question.
Thank you to Irelyn and her learning partner, Hannah Zicafoose, for their example of the carbon cycle.
Thank you to Emma Wylie, who allowed us to use her water cycle concept map.