You are on page 1of 17

RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 1

C&T 741 Portfolio:


A Review of Strategies for Comprehension and Writing
Taylor Smith
Fall 2015
Dr. Barbara Bradley
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 2

Typically, history classes are viewed as the realm where students develop their

understanding of a particular narrative, one of a linear and one-sided nature. Due to the transition

with the Common Core State Standards, students are further expected to transcend the skill-sets

learned in language arts courses into the social studies disciplines. This means that history

classes are moving away from the narrative approach and towards thinking historically. This

pedagogical shift leads to obstacles for students since they are required to not only learn the

content, but also read between the lines of certain historical narratives and evaluate them for the

purpose of developing their own conclusions about this past. Some of the positives of this change

include the integration of a diverse set of materials, rather than relying heavily on lectures and

the textbook (Barton, 2012).

However, thinking historically poses some unique problems, as curricular standards are

requiring that students read and interpret primary sources that are often above their grade-level,

and utilizing vocabulary and language that is archaic. With this, students may struggle with

considering how the authors perspective and the context of the time period impact the

documents that they are viewing. In other words, expectations require that students practice

decontextualizing their own thoughts and experiences in order to fully understand what the

documents are saying, and what they are not saying. With this, students are not just reading for

facts, but they are analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing the materialsskills that are

extremely difficult if the students are not ready (Barton, 2012).

Currently, I am in my third year of teaching at Shawnee Mission West High School, in the

Shawnee Mission School District. There are 1,800 students in grades 9 through 12, and it is

located in Overland Park, Kansas. West is an increasingly diverse school in the Shawnee Mission

School District, as the population is broken down into the following sub-groups: 14.21% African
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 3

American, 18.04 Hispanic, 58.27 White, and 9.49 Other. With this, 13% of the schools

population consists of English Language Learners (ELL), as there are a total of 250 ELL

students. Between my World Regional Studies and Modern World History classes, I teach 24

students that receive ELL services at West, and seven of these students are newcomers whom are

limited in their English proficiency. Lastly, 41.56% of the student body is economically

disadvantaged. Therefore, many of my students face significant challenges, especially with

language acquisition, when it comes to analyzing primary sources (Kansas State Department of

Education, 2014).

Currently I teach World Regional Studies, a class for Freshmen where they are exposed to

the characteristic of the worlds regions, while examining how the history of those regions has

impacted the issues that they are facing today. This course is a requirement for all freshmen, and

it is in an inclusive classroom. With this, both building and district initiatives, as well as the

requirements of the Kansas Career and College Readiness Standards, require that students are

consistently showing growth evidence-based writing across the curriculum. Therefore, West and

the District require that students in all social studies courses complete two document-based

question performance assessment during the yearrequiring that students utilize historical

thinking skills for the purpose of drawing conclusions about particular historical decisionsas

well as regular formative writing assessments where students work through the MEL-Con

writing strategy that is outlined in subsequent sections.

The other course that I currently teach is Modern World History, an elective course for

sophomores. With this class, many of the students have a high-level of interest in history, and

many of them are in Advanced-Placement courses for English, math, or science. Although

students in this class are performing at higher levels of achievement, scaffolding the historical
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 4

thinking and writing process is still necessary because they have to grapple with documents from

centuries as early as the 1300s; thus, much of the language is difficult to understand, requiring

modifications.

One of the obstacles I face in both World History and World Regional Studies is that the

curriculum is currently on a strict pacing guide with pre-selected objectives. When some of my

students are struggling with comprehension, or are still learning English, mastery is often

difficult. That being said, as you will see in some of the strategies outlined below, heavy

emphasis on scaffolding skills and the use of cooperative learning is necessary. Furthermore,

some students simply do not find certain subject material the least bit fascinating, therefore some

strategies are used to pique student interest, incorporate their schema, and provide authentic

learning experiences.

Despite some obstacles, Shawnee Mission West, as well as the entire Shawnee Mission

School District, has adopted the Rigor and Relevance framework developed by Dr. Daggett.

Therefore, the focus in the classroom has shifted from skimming the surface to digging deeper

and designing instruction and assessments that are relevant to students. When students find

success in challenging assignment, and have choice in materials that are relevant to them,

mastery of the content and skills is more likely. With this, students in SMSD have a great

advantage with the recently adopted 1:1 technology initiative. This means that all students, K-12,

are equipped with technological devices that encourage active learning and tools that enhance the

learning experience. When students begin to see the purpose of these devices as a means to learn

and explore, they are able to get out of the textbook and understand the content more deeply.

Strategies
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 5

When considering the most effective strategies for increasing comprehension through

historical thinking, the methods I selected focus on allowing students to prepare for inquiry,

gather and discuss evidence, and work towards using disciplinary tools to draw historical

conclusions. Apart from inquiry charts, I have utilized the Discrepant Event Inquiry and

historical thinking skills developed by the Stanford History Education Group on a regular basis.

By using these strategies consistently, students will work towards mastering the skill-sets needed

to think like a historian, rather than simply memorizing facts, dates, and figures. Rather, they will

be able to question historical events and decisions, and develop their own evidence-based

conclusions by corroborating a variety of sources.

Much of my pedagogical practices align with the newly adopted College, Career, & Civic

Life C3 Framework for Social Studies State Standards (2013). This framework, developed by the

National Council for the Social Studies, organizes the various disciplines into an instruction

guide known as the Inquiry Arc. This Arc is divided into 4 dimensions, guiding students towards

communicating understandings and developing authentic solutions to present-day problems.

Therefore, the following comprehension strategies begin with dimension 1preparing for

inquiryand conclude with a structure that prepares students for rigorous endeavors of

dimension 4communicating conclusions and developing real-life solutions (NCSS, 2013).

Discrepant Event Inquiry

One of the greatest obstacles faced by all teachers is intrinsically motivating students, and

piquing their interest. Thus, incorporating strategies that hook students, allow them to take

ownership of discovery, and providing opportunities for exploration moves students into their

working memory. According to Dr. Marzano, students become engaged when they are organized

for complex tasks, and are allowed to generate their own hypotheses for testing (Marzano, 2011).
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 6

That being said, the Discrepant Event Inquiry (DEI) is an exercise that serves the purpose of

engaging students in new content by allowing them to collect evidence and make predictions

about small bits of information. During the DEI process, students are reviewing the types of

questions they must ask to think historically, while drawing evidence-based conclusions. Being

in line with the C3 Framework, the DEI ultimately prepares students for inquiry (Yell, 2011).

I have utilized the DEI in a few different ways, both with visuals and riddles to carry a

tone of engagement in my classroom. When students enter the classroom, or are moving onto a

new unit of study, they are presented with a perplexing and confusing story or piece of an image.

For example, prior to learning about the understandings of the Black Plague, students

encountered the following story:

Boccaccio is the manager of a dock in a port city. One day when he is gone, his workers

unload a ship that is later seen drifting aimlessly at sea. After being told about this ship,

Boccaccio and his family mysteriously disappear and are never seen again. What

happened to Boccaccio and his family (Yell, 2013)?

After reading the story, students spend the next two minutes crafting closed-ended questions that

serve the purpose of guiding them towards the solution. Questions and answers build upon one

another requiring that students continue inquiring and developing hypotheses. The questions and

answers begin with:

Did this happen in ancient times?

o No

Was anyone on the ship?

o Yes

Did the family die?


RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 7

o No

Did the family want to leave?

o Yes

Did the family go to leave with the ship?

o No

Was it a merchant ship?

o Yes

Was it in Italy?

o Yes

As students work through the riddle, they continue asking questions until time runs out or they

develop a correct hypothesis. Either way, students are engaged and they move onto the inquiry of

study. With this strategy I have found that students are more engaged in reading the primary and

secondary sources that follow, and are curious to explore subjects that may often be thought of as

mundane (Yell, 2011). However, the one step that I would like to continue developing is having

students craft questions that they want to explore during a particular lesson or unit of study.

Historical Inquiry

Building right into the dimensions of the C3 Frameworks Inquiry Arc is the notion of

thinking like a historian. When students think, or read, like a historian, they are presented with a

series of primary source documentsas well as secondarythat they utilize for developing a

solution to a historical problem. Building off of curriculum developed by Sam Wineburg and his

colleagues at the Stanford History Education Group (SHEG), students begin thinking like a

historian when they understand and effectively source, close read, contextualize, and corroborate

evidence. However, the teacher must spend a significant portion of the school year, from the very
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 8

beginning, explicitly teaching and scaffolding this process, as the skills students are required to

effectuate are rigorous, and the documents are often archaic. Despite the challenges presented

with thinking like a historian, the Reading Like a Historian curriculum provides materials

including modified documentsthat guide student thinking throughout multiple historical events

and time periods (Reisman, 2012). Thus, the final strategies that I outline here serve the purpose

of exploring the means by which I can most effectively push students towards crafting their own

historical understandings.

One of the structures that I found best served my students with incorporating all of the

comprehension strategies needed to think historical is the Structured Academic Controversy

developed by SHEG. With this, students are posed with a controversial question where there are

multiple means by which they may interpret the documents, leading towards fruitful discussion

and deliberations. Many of the historical questions presented by SHEG have students determine

what happened at particular historical events, or unveil the characteristics of certain time periods.

However, with the Structured Academic Controversy, students must sift through evidence to

answer questions like the following;

1. Was Lincoln a racist?


2. Were African Americans free during Reconstruction?
3. Was ancient Athens truly democratic?

By looking at the multifaceted image of Abraham Lincoln, or examining the governmental and

social structures of ancient Greece, students collect and evaluate evidence for the purpose of

deliberating and crafting a consensus in regards to the controversial questions. Thus, this

particular structure leads towards authentic learning experiences and a variety of understandings

of historical events, place, and individuals (Wineburg, Martin, & Monte-Sano, 2013).
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 9

I found success with this strategy within the 8th grade American history classroom, as

well as Modern World History, despite the fact that SHEG has yet developed Structured

Academic Controversies that align with my present curriculum. That being said, I will have to

spend some time collecting documents and crafting a controversy that aligns with the curriculum,

but still holds true to the nature of the activity. For example, instead of having students craft

hypotheses about the English appeasement policy in 1938, students may explore the same

questionWas appeasement the right policy for England in 1938and documents to deliberate

and reach consensus over the foreign policy decisions that historians continuously debate and

reinterpret (SHEG, 2013).

Prior to deliberating and building consensus, as with most historical analysis, I require

that students work through an inquiry chart. The inquiry chart allows students to pull together

their close reading analysis from multiple, while making connections between a variety of

medianewspapers, speeches, political cartoons, laws, and more to their existing schema. The

charts include the list of documents on the left of the page, with the corresponding questions at

the top; thus students answer the same questions for each document, providing the means for

drawing conclusions about the particular historical investigation. The following is an example of

how to design an inquiry chart (Assaf, L., Ash, G., Saunders, J. and Johnson, J., 2011)

Quesiton 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Other interesting


facts or questions
Document 1
Document 2
Document 3

Ultimately, the of the inquiry chart supplements the procedures followed throughout the

Structured Academic Controversy. To perform the Structured Academic Controversy, students

navigate through the following procedures:


RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 10

1. Read and collect evidence from the documents


2. Divide into groups of four where they are split into team A and team B.
3. Students then re-read the documents to collect data for their argument.
I. Example:
1. Team A argues that appeasement was the right policy for England.
2. Team B argues that appeasement was the wrong policy for

England.
2. Both sides present their argument, and which each team presents; the opposing

team must record and repeat the other teams contentions and supporting

evidence.
3. With the presented evidence, students work to reach a consensus. They then report

out their consensus to the class.

Although students essentially worked through the document-based question process (DBQ), the

use of a Structured Academic Controversy allows students to work through a perplexing

historical question and engages them through a means that moves away from the typical

evidence-based writing process that often characterizes the history classroom when primary

source documents are involved. This is not to say that the use of the DBQ is an ineffective

pedagogical practice for the history classroom, however, the Structured Academic Controversy

allows all students to feel success with the historical inquiry process, of which they may not

experience if their writing skills are still being tapped, as students can use the debates and

consensus-building activities as a means to work with their peers to reach an understanding,

rather than independently organizing evidence and losing their focus in word choice and sentence

structures.

Evidence Based Writing

The importance of writing lies in the ability of the writer to convey an argument that

demonstrates the individuals critical literacy. In other words, students must learn to write, and

learn through writing, because it strengthens their ability to seek and communicate
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 11

understandings or our world. However, as argued by George Hillocks Jr. (2010), a well written

argument focuses on the light brought forth by collected data; that the foundations of the

argument begin with a careful examination of textual evidence that give rise to a claim (main

idea) or thesis. These logical appeals, rather than persuasive writing, are the basis of

argumentative writing, and this type of writing is at the core of critical thinking and academic

discourse (Hillocks, pp. 24-30).

Despite the importance of evidence-based argumentative writing, this type of discourse is

difficult for most students, especially if they struggle with organization or language proficiency.

This type of writing does not come natural to any student, and it must be taught in a way that is

simple, and with content that is relevant and appealing. That being said, this section regarding

writing focuses more on a structure that I have utilized to make the writing process obtainable for

my students. Providing organizational structures, while utilizing the inquiry methods outlined in

previous sections, makes evidence-based writing possible for all students.

With writing, much of the emphasis in the social studies classroom is that of the

Document Based Question (DBQ). The purpose of the DBQ is to guide students through

historical inquiry and argumentation. However, to supplement previous sections of this portfolio,

I will outline and review the use of a writing strategy that I have utilized and expanded district-

wide to meet our literacy initiativesMEL-Con. The MEL-Con writing strategy is one that is

applicable across content areas, and it is an advanced organizer that helps guide students through

the evidence-based writing process. Ultimately, the acronym helps students build evidence-based

writing by focusing their main idea (thesis), their evidence, the link back to their evidence (how

their evidence supports their main idea) and the concluding sentences of each body paragraph.

Some may argue that this makes the writing process formulaic, but many of my students have
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 12

made tremendous growth in their ability to articulate their arguments with supporting evidence

from their document analysis. Below, I will outline what the MEL-Con looks like in my

classroom, as well as an evaluation of advanced organizers that scaffold the writing process for

students (Schirfel, n.d.).

Within both World Regional Studies and Modern World History, the writing process only

begins after students have questioned, explored, and discussed conclusions from a variety of

sources. For example, in the example below, students completed a concept attainment to unveil

the word nationalism. Then, after creating a definition and working through examples and non-

examples, they researched and collected data about a historical or contemporary example of

nationalism. To conclude the assignment, students wrote an evidence-based paragraph to answer

the following question: What is Nationalism, and is the event you researched an example or

non-example? Although this particular lesson was focused on vocabulary acquisition, students

worked through an inquiry-based process and presented their findings through evidence-based

writing.

Depending on the need of the individual student, advanced organizers are available for

use. These advanced organizers, as presented below, provide students with a pool of transition

words, as well as a structure for writing their paragraphs. Although proving beneficial for all

students, these organizers are particularly beneficial for English Language Learners that are

growing in the proficiency of the English language. Here are a few examples of what I provide

my students with in my classroom (Schirfel, n.d.):

MEL-Con Writing Strategy Advanced Organizer


RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 13

M - Main Idea (your argument or claim)


This is what you intend to prove in your
paragraph stated in a very direct and concise
way. (Keep it simple!!)
* Should answer question posed in one
sentence.
* Should NOT start with yes or no even
though you are answering a question! * Sets
up the paragraph.
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 14

E - Evidence (example) Transition + E-Evidence:


This is how you will prove your Main Idea. Use
one time examples, facts, reasons or quotes
to prove the point you have stated you will
prove. In other words, be specific! Be complete!
Stick to your point! You must also make certain L -Link to topic (explain):
that this information moves along smoothly
with transitions.
Evidence
* Should always be prefaced by a transition.
* Should prove only the main idea nothing Transition + E-Evidence:
else
* Should use information observed or measured
(by your or someone else.)
* QUOTATIONS would fit in this category! L -Link to topic (explain):
* Evidence is the stuff you learned about the
topic.
** Should not be choppy.
** Should not ignore important evidence which
could disprove main idea. Transition + E-Evidence :
** Should define words that are not clear.
** Is something that is common. Anyone can
find and use it.
L -Link to topic (explain):
L -Link (explanation)
This explains what your evidence has proven
about your MAIN IDEA in one or two concise
sentences.
* Explains how the evidence supports your
topic.
* The link is what you think or how you relate
the evidence to the topic.
* Should move the reader beyond the main idea.

* Your link is unique. It shows your thought


processes and why

CON Conclusion (wrap-up!) The last Con:


sentence of the paragraph should be a
conclusion; a sentence that wraps everything up
and gives your paragraph closure. This should
once again stress (but reword) your first claim or
main idea. * The last sentence of your paragraph
that summarizes your answer, your evidence.
* Mentions your three pieces of evidence again in
a new, short way.
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 15

Transition Words

Phrases for Transition words Transition words for Transition Showing cause
introduction or showing context- compare/contrast words for and effect
conclusion- time and location examples
order
Furthermore After Analogous to As illustrated As a result
In addition Before As well as Coupled with Accordingly
In conclusion Beside By comparison In addition Because
Most Between Comparatively For example Consequently
importantly During Conversely For instance Due to
One In proximity to Correspondingly/ corresponding to Moreover For this reason
Overall Meanwhile Distinctively Hence
Secondly Near However Therefore
Subsequently Outside In contrast Thus
To begin Periodically In opposition
Ultimately Likewise
On the contrary
On the other hand
Nonetheless
Nevertheless
Similarly
Whereas

After implementing the MEL-Con strategy in my classroom, I found that my students writing

improved in accordance with how they presented and analyzed data collected during the inquiry

process. That being said, providing the writing structure, as well as transition words to pull from,

students will able to focus on conveying their conclusions, rather than becoming stuck in

organizational process.

Conclusion

There are many strategies that history and social studies teachers may utilize to pique

student interest and guide inquiry-based learning, but I have discovered the most success with

the structures outlined above. However, I hope to utilize these strategiesespecially Socratic

Circlesmore often for the purpose of creating authentic learning opportunities that align with
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 16

the C3 Framework. As students become more familiar with the processes associated with

historical thinking, they will find that these strategies transcend beyond the history classroom.

Although they may never sit amongst peers to deliberate democracy in ancient Athens, or the

tribulations or Martin Luther, students will find it necessary to consider the context of speeches

given by politicians, or adopted policies as a necessity when determining who to support in

elections, or if they should approve of present policy decisions made by their local school

boards. Thus, I will continue developing my practice of these strategies in hopes of guiding

students towards critically examining historical mysteries and contemporary considerations.

References

Assaf, L., Ash, G., Saunders, J. and Johnson, J. (2011). "Renewing Two Seminal Literacy
Practices: I-Charts and I-Search Papers." English Journal, 18(4), 31-42.
Avishag Reisman (2012) Reading Like a Historian: A Document-Based History Curriculum
Intervention in Urban High Schools, Cognition and Instruction, 30:1, 86-112, DOI:
10.1080/07370008.2011.634081.
AVID. Elective Teacher Training: Socratic Seminars. AVID Weekly Retrived from:
http://www.santeefalcons.org/apps/download/Qc101URJbVZajxNp3vVZnm5eacpjdh6cG
kpxp4f 4mPwiBuxY.pdf/Socratic%20Seminar%20Handouts.pdf.
Barton, Keith (2012). History: From Learning Narratives to Thinking Historically.
Contemporary Social Studies: An Essential Reader, pages 119-138. Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing.
RunningHead:C&T741Portfolio 17

Copeland, Matthew (2005). Socratic Circles: Fostering Critical and Creative Thinking in
Middle and High School. Portland, MA: Stenhouse Publishers.
Facing History and Ourselves (2014). Socratic Seminar. Retrived from:
https://www.facinghistory.org/for-educators/educator-resources/teaching
strategies/socratic-seminar.
Hillocks, G. (2010). Teaching argument for critical thinking and writing: An
introduction. English Journal 99(6): 24-32.
Kansas State Department of Education Report Card 2013-2014. (2014). Retrieved from
https://online.ksde.org/rcard/building.aspx?org_no=D0512&bldg_no=8894
Library of Congress. Primary Source Analysis Tool. Retrieved from:
http://www.loc.gov/teachers/primary-source-analysis-tool/
Mary E. Styslinger and Jessica F. Overstreet (2014). Strengthening Argumentative Writing with
Speaking and Listening (Socratic) Circles. Voices from the Middle, Volume 22 Number
September 2014. http://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Resources/Journals/VM/0221-
sep2014/VM0221Strength.pdf.
NCSS (2013). Social studies for the next generation: Purposes, practices, and implications of
the college, career, and civic life (C3) : Framework for social studies state standards.
National Council for the Social Studies.
Olsen, J and Sarah Gross (2014). Skills Practice: Socratic Seminars Using Informational
Text. The New York Times. Retrived from:
http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/14/skills-practice-socratic-seminars-using-
informational-text/?_r=0.
Schiferl , J. (n.d.). MEL-Con Writing. Retrieved March 14, 2017, from
http://melcon.weebly.com/index.html
Wineburg, S, Martin, D., & Monte-Sano, C (2013). Reading like a historian: Teaching literacy
in middle and high school history classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College Press,
Yell, Michael (2013). Exploring the Black Death: The Medieval View and Response
Social Education 77(6), pp 346349 2013 National Council for the Social Studies.
Yell, Michael (2011). Michael Yell on Developing a Climate of Engagement.
Teachinghistory.org: National History Education Clearinghouse.
http://teachinghistory.org/nhec-blog/24402.

You might also like