Resources

Archer, A. (n.d.). Video demonstration: Pronunciation of multi-syllabic passage words – sixth grade language arts. Retrieved from http://explicitinstruction.org/?page_id=315

Bismonte, A. R., Foley, C. L., & Petty, J. A. (1994). Effectiveness of the Possible Sentences vocabulary strategy with middle school students in Guam. Reading Improvement, 31(4), 194–99.

Carver, R. P. (1994). Percentage of unknown vocabulary words in text as a function of the relative difficulty of the text: Implications for instruction. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26, 413–437.

Cirino, P. T., Romain, M. A., Barth, A. E., Tolar, T. D., Fletcher, J. M., & Vaughn, S. (2013). Reading skill components and impairments in middle school struggling readers. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26, 1059–1086. doi: 10.1007/s11145-012-9406-3

Denton, C. A., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Bryan, D., & Reed, D. (2012). Effective instruction for middle school students with reading difficulties: The reading teacher’s sourcebook. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Firmender, J. M., Reis, S. M., & Sweeny, S. M. (2012). Reading comprehension and fluency levels ranges across diverse classrooms: The need for differentiated reading instruction and content. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57, 3–14. doi: 10.1177/0016986212460084

Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2012). Text complexity: Raising rigor in reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Frayer, D. A., Frederick, W. C., & Klausmeier, H. G. (1969). A schema for testing the level of concept mastery (Technical report No. 16). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning.

Grades 7/8, Unit 3, Module 1, Handout 5: Anticipation-Reaction Guide: Science Sample. Adapted from the Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk. (2009). Texas adolescent literacy academies. Austin, TX: Author.

Grades 7/8, Unit 3, Module 1, Video 1: Anticipation-Reaction Guide: Before Reading. Adapted from the Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk. (2009). Texas adolescent literacy academies. Austin, TX: Author.

Grades 7/8, Unit 3, Module 1, Video 2: Anticipation-Reaction Guide: During Reading. Adapted from the Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk. (2009). Texas adolescent literacy academies. Austin, TX: Author.

Grades 7/8, Unit 3, Module 1, Video 3: Anticipation-Reaction Guide: After Reading. Adaapted from the Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk. (2009). Texas adolescent literacy academies. Austin, TX: Author.

Hayes, D. P., Wolfer, L. T., & Wolfe, M. F. (1996). Sourcebook simplification and its relation to the decline in SAT-Verbal scores. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 489–508.

Hubisz, J. L. (2001). Report on a study of middle school physical science texts. The Physics Teacher, 39, 304–309.

Kucer, S. B. (2010). Readers’ tellings: narrators, settings, flashbacks and comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading, 33, 320–331.

Mesmer, H. A. E. (2005). Text accessibility and the struggling reader. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 21, 1–5.

Monte-Sano, C. (2011). Beyond reading comprehension and summary: Learning to read and write in history by focusing on evidence, perspective, and interpretation. Curriculum Inquiry, 41, 212–249.

Moore, D. W., & Moore, S. A. (1986). Possible sentences. In E. K. Dishner, T. W. Bean, J. E. Readence, & D. W. Moore (Eds.). Reading in the content areas (pp. 174–178). Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.

Nagy, W., & Scott, J. A. (2006). The state of vocabulary research in the mid-1980’s. In K. A. D. Stahl & M. C. McKenna (Eds.), Reading research at work: Foundations of effective practice (pp. 217–225). New York: Guilford Press

Nagy, W., & Townsend, D. (2012). Words as tools: Learning academic vocabulary as language acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly, 47, 91–108.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors. Retrieved from www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_ELA%20Standards.pdf

Possible Sentences Video Clips. (n.d.). Courtesy of Voyager Spris Learning, Inc.

Reed, D. K., & Kershaw, S. (manuscript under review). An examination of text complexity by readability and coherence. Journal of Experimental Education.

Reed, D. K., Swanson, E. A., Petscher, Y., & Vaughn, S. (In press). The relative effects of teacher read–alouds and student silent reading on predominantly bilingual high school seniors’ learning and retention of social studies content. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal.

Reed, D. K., Wexler, J., & Vaughn, S. (2012). RTI for reading at the secondary level: Recommended literacy practices and remaining questions. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Smith, B. L., Holliday, W. G., & Austin, H. W. (2010). Students’ coprehension of science textbooks using a question-based reading strategy. Journal of Research in science Teaching, 47(4), 363–79.

Stahl, S. A., & Kapinus, B. A. (1991). Possible Sentences: Predicting word meanings to teach content area vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 45(1), 36–43.

Stromso, H. I., Braten, I., & Britt, M. A. (2010). Reading multiple texts about climate change: The relationship between memory for sources and text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 20, 192–204.

Swanson, E., Wanzek, J., McCulley, L., Stillman. S. J. (In review). An observation study of reading practices used during middle and high school English language arts and social studies classes. Reading and Writing Quarterly.

Vaughn, S., Edmonds, M., Simmons, D. C., & Rupley, W. H. (2006). Enhancing the quality of expository text instruction and comprehension through content and case-situated professional development. Washington, DC: U.S. Departments of Education, Institute of Education Sciences

Vaughn, S., Swanson, E. A., Roberts, G., Wanzek, J., Stillman-Spisak, S. J., Solis, M., & Simmons, D. (2013). Improving reading comprehension and social studies knowledge in middle school. Reading Research Quarterly, 48, 77–93.

Williamson, G. L. (2006). Aligning the journey with a destination: A model for K–16 reading standards. Durham, NC: MetaMetrics, Inc.

Beach, K. D., Sanchez, V., Flynn, L. J., & O’Connor, R. R. (2015). Teaching academic vocabulary to adolescents with learning disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 48(1), 36–44.

In this journal article, the authors overview the importance of teaching academic vocabulary and provide a detailed five-step process for doing so. In addition, the authors cover word selection, the presentation of words in meaningful contexts, and sentence writing opportunities. A number of helpful sample classroom scripts and activities are also included.

Swanson, E., & Wexler, J. (2017). Selecting appropriate text for adolescents with disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 49(3), 160–167.

Here the authors detail strategies for improving access to the general education curriculum via reading for students with disabilities. Overviewed is the use of quantitative and qualitative information, as well as notes on how to select text appropriate to a given student’s learning characteristics.

Swanson, E., Vaughn, S., & Wexler, J. (2017). Enhancing adolescents’ comprehension of text by building vocabulary knowledge. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 50(2), 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059917720777

What are reasonable vocabulary learning goals for teachers to set for their students? The authors of this article set out to answer that question while overviewing teacher-directed explicit vocabulary instruction, vocabulary routines, co-teaching strategies, and more.

Vaughn, S., Roberts, G., Schnakenberg, J. B., Fall, A. M., Vaughn, M. g., & Wexler, J. (2015). Improving reading comprehension for high school students with disabilities: Effects for comprehension and school retention. Exceptional Children, 82(1), 117–131.

This study follows a group of students through two years of reading comprehension instruction, and finds that extensive interventions for high school students not only produce better reading outcomes but also help to ameliorate the drop-out rates among students most at risk of leaving school early.

Lawrence, J. F., White, C., & Snow, C. E. (2010). The words students need. Educational Leadership, 68(2), 23–26. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/46v4m4z0

This brief but helpful resource is all about the importance of vocabulary instruction at the middle school level. The authors stress the importance of this context-rich vocabulary instruction and suggest the importance of going beyond dictionary definitions by allowing students repeated exposure to important vocabulary words and room to experiment with their use.

Snow, C., & O’Connor, C. (2013). Close reading and far-reaching classroom discussion: Fostering a vital connection. Retrieved from https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/close-reading-policy-brief.pdf

This policy brief from the Literacy Research Panel of the International Reading Association offers a more nuanced take on the emphasis on close reading in the CCSS. Included here is an overview of the most common objections to close reading, a reminder about the critical necessity of background knowledge to any close reading exercise, and a suggestion for future instructional reform in which close reading is a tool for achieving deeper understanding of complex ideas and histories rather than an end in and of itself.

National Institute for Literacy & National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2007). What content-area teachers should know about adolescent literacy. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/adolescent_literacy07.pdf

One of the most pressing challenges of secondary literacy instruction is for teachers to understand how and why adolescent readers read the way they do. This resource sets out to answer many of these questions, including information on how “good” readers engage a text, how instruction can improve reading fluency, and detailed notes on vocabulary and comprehension instruction, in addition to much more.

Text Dependent Questions and the CCSS. (n.d.) Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED541437.pdf

Achieve the Core https://achievethecore.org/ hosts:
• Quantitative and qualitative tools for measuring text complexity.
• Sample lessons applying literacy standards in English language arts, history/social studies,
and science.
• Research and other articles on text complexity.
• Professional development modules and courses related to the Common Core State Standards.
.
This website—home of a non-profit organization founded by the lead writers of the CCSS—offers a wealth of information and tools for those who wish to improve the implementation of the Common Core. Visitors will find sample lessons and student work samples, as well as curricular tools, assessment questions, and resources for professional development, among much, much more.

Florida Center for Reading Research https://fcrr.org/

Headquartered at Florida State University, the FCRR offers online tools and resources for teachers and researchers, including information on differentiating instruction, instructional routines, literacy resources, and questions to guide instruction.

Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts https://www.meadowscenter.org/vgc/

The Vaughn Gross Center is the online home for a vast array of resources for professional development. Visitors will find links to current projects, an expansive materials list (helpfully arranged by topic, resource type, and audience), notes on upcoming events, and much more.