Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons

School of Education: Faculty Publications and Other Works Faculty Publications

Winter 2013

Critical Literacy, Common Core, and “Close Reading”

Aimee Ellis Loyola University Chicago, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/education_facpubs

Part of the Education Commons

Recommended Citation Ellis, Aimee. "Critical Literacy, Common Core, and 'Close Reading.'" Colorado Reading Journal, Winter 2013.

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in School of Education: Faculty Publications and Other Works by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected].

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. © Colorado Council International Reading Association, 2013. Critical Literacy, Common Core, and “Close Reading”

Aimee L. Papola

Teachers who support their students in critical literacy are helping them become open minded, actively engaged, analytical readers who go beyond the demands of the CCSS and become informed consumers of all texts. These students will have an understanding of multiple viewpoints, the ways in which text and language create power relations, and ways that literacy activities can lead to social justice issues and social action.

Across the United States, teachers from kinder - Defining Close Reading garten through high school are being asked to implement Although “close reading” is not a part o f the actual a new set o f standards—the Common Core State Stan - CCSS, it has become a significant concept and phrase dards (CCSS)—in order to prepare our nation’s students associated with the new standards. The Revised Publish - to be “college and career ready” (National Governors Asso - ers’ Criteria (Coleman & Pimentel, 2012) includes the ciation Center for Best Practices & Council o f Chie f State term close reading throughout the document, resulting in School Officers [NGA Center & CCSSO], 2010). Besides teacher resources and textbook companies creating mate - learning the language and demands o f the standards, rials focused on this type o f instructional approach. Close teachers are exposed to videos, professional development, reading can be defined in a variety o f ways. According to and materials developed by groups and individuals sug - the Partnership for Assessment o f Readiness for College gesting ways they should shift their instruction to align and Careers (PARCC 2011), one o f the organizations cre - to the expectations o f the CCSS. ating assessments for CCSS, In addition to asking teachers to include more infor - mational text in their classrooms and to focus on text- Close, analytic reading stresses engaging with dependent questions, another common concept that a text of sufficient complexity directly and inevitably comes up in conversations regarding the CCSS examining its meaning thoroughly and is the idea of close reading. Teacher resource books, pro - methodically, encouraging students to read fessional development workshops, and even the Publishers’ and reread deliberately. Directing student Criteria associated with the standards (Coleman & attention on the text itself empowers students Pimentel, 2012) define and sell their approaches to this to understand the central ideas and key sup - idea of close reading, touting their approach as “the way” porting details. (p. 7) to help students become analytical readers who can meet Student Achievement Partners, an organization that the demands of the Common Core. In the following sec - develops materials to “support teachers” with implement - tions, I propose that taking a critical literacy approach to ing CCSS, offers passages with prewritten questions and texts can not only help students become “close readers,” multiple readings as the approach to close reading (Stu - but can move beyond the demands of the CCSS and sup - dent Achievement Partners, n.d.). Both o f these organiza - port students in becoming informed, engaged, and tions offer a certain way to approach the concept o f close empowered readers of the many texts they will encounter.

46 CRITICAL LITERACY , C OMMON CORE , AND “C LOSE READING ”

reading, with heavy emphasis on language and text; challenging teacher-directed questioning and Essential Principles of the status quo; deconstructing more focus on literal compre - Critical Literacy Theory and reconstructing texts; focusing hension. However, this rereading 1. Examining the relationship of on sociopolitical issues; and tak - of a text in order to answer ques - ing steps for social justice power through language and text tions is not the only approach to through action (Comber, 2001; analytical, close reading. 2. Challenging the status quo Lewison, Flint, & Van Sluys, 2002; Despite the new attention 3. Deconstructing and reconstructing Luke & Freebody, 1999; to close reading, it is, in fact, not texts McLaughlin & DeVoogd, 2010; a new concept. Literacy experts 4. Focusing on sociopolitical issues Shannon, 1990). have been discussing careful and Taking a critical literacy 5. Taking steps for social justice analytical approaches to texts for stance as a reader entails not only through action years, with strong ties to the sig - reading the words in the text but nificant work of Rosenblatt also understanding the sociocultu - (1978) and her theories involving Critical Literacy Questions ral factors in which that text exists the transaction between the • Whose voices are heard and whose in order to examine the purpose of reader and text as a means to are silenced? the text, rather than being manip - understanding what the author • Who is privileged and who is ulated by it (McLaughlin & has to say. Many literacy experts marginalized in the text? DeVoogd, 2004). It is a lens offer a definition of close reading • What does the author want us to through which readers view the as an outcome to careful, pur - think? text, helping to go beyond simplis - poseful rereading of worthy texts tic personal responses to examine that ask readers to understand • How does the author use specific ways that these responses have not just what the text says, but language to promote his or her been socially constructed and also how the text works, its con - beliefs? shaped by their world (Jewett, nection to other texts, and what • What action might you take based 2007). In the following sections, I the text means through a variety on what you have learned from the will examine specific anchor stan - of strategies (Fisher & Frey, 2012; text? dards in the CCSS as well as the Shanahan, 2013). (McLaughlin & DeVoogd, 2004). idea of close reading and link these When considering all the to critical literacy strategies includ - definitions of close reading, it ing interrogating multiple view - becomes evident that the key is careful, analytical reading points, questioning the text, and examining socio political of text. If teachers help students learn to read with a crit - issues. ical literacy lens, this analytical approach is inherent in Interrogating Multiple Viewpoints the interaction with the text, as well as the development According to Lewison et al. (2002), interrogating of a deeper awareness of sociocultural factors shaping multiple viewpoints is a key tenet to critical literacy. Read - readers and texts. In the following sections, I will share a ing a variety o f texts from multiple perspectives allows brief background of critical literacy theory and how it can readers to gain a deeper insight on a topic or issue. This be directly linked with the idea of close reading and the act helps readers see not only that the same topic can be Common Core State Standards viewed from several perspectives, but also that a single text Background on Critical Literacy can have multiple meanings depending on the reader’s experiences and viewpoints (Ciardiello, 2004). Examining Several key pedagogical principles o f critical literacy texts—through reading or through writing—from a variety can be agreed upon by the majority o f critical literacy the - of perspectives poses a challenge to students to explore orists and scholars. Most critical literacy theorists see lan - diverse positions and understandings, which will expand guage and literacy as political acts with ties to power their own thinking and make the text under examination relations in society. Literacy educators, under the lens o f more complex (McLaughlin & DeVoogd, 2004). critical literacy, are charged with helping students develop To connect this critical literacy tenet to the CCSS, skills that enable them to enact social change. These skills teachers should examine anchor standard 9: “Analyze how stem from essential principles o f critical literacy theory, including examining the relationship o f power through two or more texts address similar themes or topics in order

47 C OLORADO R EADING J OURNAL — W INTER 2013

to build knowledge or to compare the approaches the that needed to be considered when establishing the pur - authors take.” (NGA Center & CCSSO, 2010). This pose and need for the law, as well as reasons individuals directly relates to the idea of interrogating multiple view - might oppose the law. This is a great support to imple - points or perspectives. In the primary grades, teachers menting key principles of CCSS in the classroom, with might read fractured fairy tales that offer multiple per - the increasing emphasis on disciplinary literacy. spectives on the same familiar tale, told from a variety of Questioning a Text From a Critical Lens characters’ points of view. Reading these stories to deter - Questioning the text is a skill built directly into the mine whose voice is represented requires careful and close CCSS. For example, anchor standard 1 at the primary level reading, particularly when students are asked to question (grades K–3) involves asking and answer - the language used by particular characters ing questions about a text, with support telling their version of a specific event. These questions go way in earliest grades and indepen dently by Students can ponder, through close analy - beyond the simple who, grade 3 (NGA Center & CCSSO, 2010). sis, how language changes when the tale is These questions are meant, according to told from a different perspective. Students what, where, when, why CCSS, to be grounded deeply within the in upper grades can apply this tenet of format o f questioning as text at hand; however, these questions critical literacy by gathering articles about need not be only literal comprehension a common current event topic from a wide suggested in the CCSS, but level questions to be considered “text range of news sources or blogs. By reading allow students to answer dependent.” different sources with a critical lens, stu - A big part o f critical literacy is this dents can begin to understand how cer - those same types o f ques - practice o f questioning. McLaughlin and tain language and visuals can be used to tions in the process. DeVoogd (2004) share examples o f many manipulate readers and to assert the questions that can be applied to any text author’s intentions and beliefs. A brief but that take a critical lens. Some exam - reading of a text would not allow for such h ples o f these types o f questions include deep understanding—this activity is at the the following: heart of close, analytical reading. • Whose voices are heard and whose are silenced? Reading a wide range of texts from multiple per - • Who is privileged and who is marginalized in the spectives can be done in many classes across the content text? areas, including literature, social studies, science, and • What does the author want us to think? math (McLaughlin & DeVoogd, 2004). Teachers could • How does the author use specific language to begin by taking a topic that is relevant to all students in promote his or her beliefs? the school, such as a rule about chewing gum in the class - • What action might you take based on what you room. The students could examine this issue from a vari - have learned from the text? ety of perspectives—the principal, the classroom teacher, students who concentrate better when chewing gum, stu - These questions go way beyond the simple who, what, where, when, why format of questioning as suggested in the dents who are distracted by gum chewing, custodians at CCSS, but allow students to answer those same types of the school—in order to better understand the need for the questions in the process. rule and whose voices were represented when creating the Consider applying critical literacy based questioning rule. This introduction to taking on other perspectives by reading The Other Side by Jacqueline Woodson (2001). can help students approach texts with a more global and In this story, two young girls—one Caucasian and one diverse lens. Additionally, this approach can lead into African American—are neighbors, separated by a literal wider analysis of a historical event in a social studies class fence. Their mothers tell the girls not to cross the fence, from a range of perspectives. For example, the teacher so the main characters decide to sit on the fence, and a might link this activity to studying the creation of the friendship begins between the two. Students can be asked United States Constitution, asking students to question to analyze the text through a close reading by asking whose voices were represented in the creation of this doc - whose voice is heard and whose is missing, as well as what ument and whose perspectives were missing. Students the author wants us to think after reading this book. also can examine newer laws that have been passed either These are critical literacy questions that allow students to locally or nationally, looking for different perspectives interrogate a text at a deeper level, and consider the

48 CRITICAL LITERACY , C OMMON CORE , AND “C LOSE READING ”

embedded sociopolitical issues. Readers need to make inferences (also a significant part o f anchor standard 1 in Picture Books to Support Critical upper grades) to understand the setting o f the story as Literacy and Close Reading well as the theme. In reading closely with this lens, stu - dents would undoubtedly be able to answer those explicit Click, Clack, Moo: Cows That Type questions such as Who are the characters in the story?, D. Cronin (2000). New York: Simon & Schuster. How did the main characters change?, or Where does the Encounter story take place? However, they could ask and answer J. Yolen (1992). San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace. much more meaningful questions, such as What is the sig - nificance o f the time period in which this story takes Faithful Elephants place?, How might the story be different or the same i f Y. Tsuchiya (1988). New York: Houghton Mifflin. told today?, or What does the fence represent? All o f these Fly Away Home questions are still text-dependent , as they require deep, ana - E. Bunting (1991). New York: Clarion Books. lytical thinking about the text to be able to answer. Disrupting the commonplace through questioning If a Bus Could Talk: can occur across content areas as well. In a social studies The Story o f Rosa Parks classroom, students can apply critical literacy and ques - F. Ringgold (1999). New York: Scholastic. tioning to challenge the author’s intent when writing The Other Side political propaganda, or examine who is represented and J. Woodson (2001). New York: Putnam. who is marginalized in a variety of texts recounting a his - torical event, including primary sources. Careful exami - Something Beautiful nation of statistics and graphs in a math class requires a S.D. Wyeth (1998). New York: Doubleday. critically literate lens to empower students when consum - Those Shoes ing the information and avoid being manipulated by it. M. Boelts (2007). Somerville, MA: Candlewick Teachers can also help students use questioning and crit - Press. ical literacy to explore the perspectives present in their textbooks, and the “hidden curriculum” that is often pres - Voices in the Park ent in these texts. A. Browne (1998). New York: DK Publishing. The Wretched Stone Focus on Sociopolitical Issues C. Van Allsburg (1991). New York: Houghton A significant part o f critical literacy is examining Mifflin. texts o f all kinds for systems o f power. When readers take on this lens, they go beyond a personal reaction to a text and examine the sociocul tural factors that contribute to ployment, class systems, and discrimination that are pres - shaping their personal reactions (Lewison et al., 2002). ent within the text. Proponents o f the CCSS often discuss the idea o f having When teachers seek out texts that are worthy exem - students go past their surface-level responses or connec - plars for close reading activities in the classroom, they can tions to a text, making this the ideal approach to close increase student engagement by examining the social reading o f text that supports the Common Core. issues that their students relate to, as opposed to selecting Teachers of all grades could consider Anthony books only from a predetermined list that certain individ - Browne’s Voices in the Park (2001) as an anchor text for this uals have deemed appropriate. Lewison et al. (2002) approach to close reading. In this picture book, four char - worked with classroom teachers new to including critical acters’ perspectives are shared on one event—an afternoon literacy in their classrooms. One o f those teachers was sur - at the local park. A surface-level reading might reflect a prised at the increased interest and engagement her fifth basic understanding that people see the same event in dif - graders had when reading texts that focused on social ferent ways (which is still a beneficial lesson for students issues. Older students might take it further to the social beginning to understand the previously mentioned aspect action stage o f critical literacy, where they look for oppor - of critical literacy, interrogating multiple perspectives). tunities in their own communities to challenge the status However, when teachers incorporate examination of quo and take action against social injustice after closely sociopolitical issues into a close reading of this text, read - deconstructing texts that relate to various issues. ers begin to notice socioeconomic factors such as unem -

49 C OLORADO R EADING J OURNAL — W INTER 2013

Concluding Thoughts Aimee L. Papola is an assistant professor in the School of Education at Loyola University Teachers who support their students in critical lit - Chicago. She teaches literacy courses in the eracy are helping them become open minded, actively undergraduate teacher education program, engaged, analytical readers who go beyond the demands including “Children’s Literature” and “Lan - of the CCSS and become informed consumers o f all texts. guage and Literacy for Diverse Students.” These students will have an understanding o f multiple Her research interests include critical literacy, viewpoints, the ways in which text and language create teacher education, and literacy instruction in power relations, and ways that literacy activities can lead diverse classrooms. Prior to beginning her career at Loyola, to social justice issues and social action. This not only Aimee spent 12 years as an elementary teacher and reading spe - helps students become “close readers” who can meet cialist, including 5 years teaching in remote regions of Alaska. demands o f the Common Core, but also empowered read - She completed her PhD in literacy studies at the University of ers who can navigate a wide range o f diverse texts with a Nevada Reno. critically literate lens.

References Browne, A. (2001). Voices in the park . New York: DK Publishing. McLaughlin, M., & DeVoogd, G. (2010). Critical literacy as compre - Ciardiello, A.V. (2004). Democracy’s young heroes: An instructional hension: Understanding at deeper levels. In D. Lapp & D. Fisher model of critical literacy practices. The Reading Teacher, 58 (2), 138– (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (pp. 147. 278–282). New York: Routledge. Coleman, D., & Pimentel, S. (2012). Revised publishers’ criteria for National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council the Common Core State Standards in English language arts and of Chief State School Officers (NGA Center & CCSSO). (2010). literacy, grades 3–12. Available at: www.corestandards.org/assets/ Common Core State Standards: English language arts. Washing - Publishers_Criteria_for_3-12.pdf ton, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Prac - Comber, B. (2001). Critical literacies and local action: Teacher knowl - tices & Council of Chief State School Officers. edge and a “new” research agenda. In B. Comber & A. Simpson Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (Eds.), Negotiating critical literacies in classrooms (pp. 271–282). (PARCC). (2011). PARCC model content frameworks: English language Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. arts/literacy grades 3–11 . Retrieved from www.parcconline.org/ Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2012). Close reading in elementary schools. sites/parcc/files/PARCCMCFELALiteracyAugust2012_FINAL.pdf The Reading Teacher, 66 (3), 179–188. Rosenblatt, L.M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional Jewett, P. (2007). Reading knee-deep. Reading Psychology, 28 (2), 149– theory of the literary work . Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Uni - 162. versity Press. Lewison, M., Flint, A.S., Van Sluys, K. (2002). Taking on critical lit - Shanahan, T. (2013, April 23). “A time for humility.” Retrieved from eracy: The journey of newcomers and novices. Language Arts, www.shanahanonliteracy.com/search/label/Close reading 79 (5), 382–392. Shannon, P. (1990). The struggle to continue: Progressive reading instruc - Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (1999, August 19). Further notes on the four tion in the United States . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. resources model. Retrieved February 14, 2013, from www.reading Student Achievement Partners (n.d.). Close reading exemplars. online.org/research/lukefreebody.html Retrieved from http://www.achievethecore.org/ela-literacy McLaughlin, M., & DeVoogd, G. (2004). Critical literacy as compre - -common-core/sample-lessons/close-reading-exemplars/ hension: Expanding reader response. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Woodson, J. (2001). The other side . New York: Putnam Juvenile. Literacy, 48 (1), 52–82.

50