Assignment: Create And Implement A Close Reading Activity ✓ Solved

Assignment: Create and implement a close reading activity addressing

Assignment: Create and implement a close reading activity addressing text-dependent questions for grades 4–6. In a small-group setting, develop an instructional plan template that includes planning standards, learning objectives, instructional strategies, materials, differentiation, assessment, and closure. Then write a 3-page APA-style summary/reflection describing: (1) the selected high-quality text for grades 4–6 and justification based on text complexity and learners’ characteristics, (2) pre-assessment data and how it informed planning, (3) how students responded during the writing activity and rationale for the writing approach with examples, (4) how you developed students’ metacognition about the text, (5) the text-dependent questions you created and why, and (6) conclusions to inform future instruction. Include in-text citations and a references list with at least 10 credible sources.

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction and purpose. The core aim of this assignment is to design, implement, and reflect on a close reading activity that foregrounds text-dependent questioning (TDQ) for readers in grades 4–6. Grounded in research on close reading and evidence-based practice, the activity centers students on extracting meaning directly from the text to support evidence-based claims. The scholarly literature strongly supports using TDQs to scaffold literal comprehension, interpretive reasoning, and analytic argument, all while aligning with college- and career-readiness standards (Frey & Fisher, 2014; Duke & Pearson, 2002; Kamil et al., 2008). In planning the session, teachers must connect tasks to relevant standards and purposefully select a text that challenges readers at an appropriate level (Biancarosa & Snow, 2004; Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2012).

Text selection and justification. For the close reading activity, select a high-quality informational or literary text appropriate for Grades 4–6 that supports evidence-based interpretation. The text should present multiple layers of meaning and allow for justification from explicit textual evidence. Text complexity principles, including quantitative measures (e.g., Lexile level), qualitative features (e.g., structure, knowledge demands), and reader considerations (e.g., prior knowledge, linguistic complexity), should guide selection (Common Core, 2012). The justification should describe how the text aligns with learners’ current capabilities, background knowledge, and language supports, drawing on prior assessments and pre-reading activities (Dalton, 2013; Burke, n.d.). The literature emphasizes selecting texts that promote deep questioning, cross-text connections, and opportunities for students to articulate evidence-based interpretations (ILA/NCTE, 2014; Applegate, Quinn, & Applegate, 2006).

Pre-assessment and diagnostic data. Before designing the TDQ-focused activity, collect pre-assessment data to establish a baseline of students’ decoding, vocabulary, comprehension, and metacognitive awareness. Use a combination of quick checks, reading inventories, and targeted prompts to determine strengths and needs. Pre-assessment data should inform grouping (e.g., ability-based or mixed-ability small groups), text selection, and scaffolds (Frey & Fisher, 2014; Biancarosa & Snow, 2004). Document learners’ prior knowledge and potential language supports needed for non-native English learners as part of differentiation planning (Kamil et al., 2008).

Text-dependent questions (TDQs). Develop a set of TDQs that require readers to cite specific evidence from the text, analyze word meanings in context, interpret author intent, and connect details to central ideas. TDQs should move from comprehension to analysis, inference, and evaluation, prompting students to justify their responses with textual evidence (ILA/NCTE, 2014; Applegate et al., 2006). Include a variety of question stems aligned to Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy, with higher-order prompts (analyzing, evaluating, creating) integrated into the activity. Provide rationale for each TDQ, noting how it prompts evidence-based reasoning rather than superficial recall (Dalton, 2013).

Metacognition and student self-regulation. A core goal is to cultivate students’ metacognitive awareness during close reading. Incorporate think-aloud modeling, explicit prompts for monitoring comprehension, and self-questioning routines that help students identify when and why to revisit text evidence. Metacognitive prompts should be woven into each TDQ set, with a debrief at the end of the session to reflect on strategies used and their effectiveness (Pardo, 2009; Burke, n.d.).

Instructional plan template and alignment. The comprehensive plan should include sections that map standards (state, national, or CCSS), learning outcomes, objectives, materials, instructional strategies, grouping, access and supports for diverse learners, assessment methods, and closure. Connect each activity to the standard(s) and objective(s), specifying how Bloom’s taxonomy levels are addressed (Educators often reference Higher-Order Thinking Verbs to target evaluating and creating). The plan should also describe real-world contexts and opportunities for transfer to reading and writing in other domains, demonstrating collaboration with families and specialists as appropriate (ILA/NCTE, 2014; Frey & Fisher, 2014).

Diversity, accessibility, and differentiation. Address diverse learners’ needs by planning for multiple intelligences, language proficiency levels, and cultural backgrounds. Provide at least two differentiated supports for each of three dimensions: curriculum (content), instruction (process), and assessment (product). Clarify how students with IEPs/504 plans or English learners will access the TDQ tasks, including embedded supports such as vocabulary previews, graphic organizers, and sentence frames (Duke & Pearson, 2002; Biancarosa & Snow, 2004).

Closure, assessment, and reflection. Conclude with a synthesis activity that requires students to present evidence-based conclusions drawn from text-dependent reasoning. Use rubrics or checklists aligned to the TDQs and the learning objectives to assess growth and attainment. Include a reflection component that examines what worked, what did not, and how instructional practice would be adjusted to support Grades 4–6 learners in future TDQ-based close reading tasks (Applegate et al., 2006; Kamil et al., 2008).

Three-page summary/reflection. The sum/reflection should address: (a) text choice rationale and text complexity considerations; (b) pre-assessment data and how it shaped planning; (c) student responses during the writing component and rationale for the writing approach with concrete examples; (d) metacognition development and prompts used; (e) the TDQs created and justification; (f) conclusions to inform future practice for Grades 4–6. Include student work samples as appendices and cite sources in APA format throughout the narrative (Frey & Fisher, 2014; Burke, n.d.; Dalton, 2013; ILA/NCTE, 2014).

References and citations. The paper should include in-text citations aligned with APA formatting and conclude with a References section containing credible sources that inform close reading and TDQ practices for Grades 4–6. A minimum of ten references is expected, drawn from the scholarly literature on close reading, TDQs, and literacy instruction (e.g., Applegate, Quinn, & Applegate, 2006; Dalton, 2013; Biancarosa & Snow, 2004; Kamil et al., 2008; Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2012; Frey & Fisher, 2014; Burke, n.d.; ILA/NCTE, 2014; National Reading Panel, 2000; Duke & Pearson, 2002).

References

  • Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (2006). Profiles in comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 60(1), 48–57.
  • Dalton, B. (2013). Engaging children in close reading: Multimodal commentaries and illustration remix. The Reading Teacher, 66(8), 642–649.
  • Burke, B. (n.d.). A close look at close reading: Scaffolding students with complex texts. Retrieved May 15, 2016, from READ: Reading and Literacy Growth.
  • International Literacy Association (ILA) & National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE). (2014). ReadWriteThink: Depend on text! How to create text-dependent questions. Retrieved from http://www.readwritethink.org
  • Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2012). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects: English language arts: Appendix B: Text exemplars and sample performance tasks. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Appendix_B.pdf
  • Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2014). Close reading across the content areas. The Reading Teacher, 67(5), 350–357.
  • Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next: A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy. Alliance for Excellent Education.
  • Kamil, M. L., Moseley, C., et al. (2008). Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective classroom practices. Alliance for Excellent Education.
  • National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. NIH.
  • Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective practices for reading comprehension. In C. R. Biancarosa & E. L. D. Nielsen (Eds.), Reading research quarterly (vol. 37, pp. 1–20).

Related Assignments