This post is the second of 3 posts, it builds upon the ideas found in the Reading Literary Texts, Standard 3 post, and discusses Reading Informational Texts, Standard 3.
When looking at Reading Standard 3, I find it interesting how the anchor standard only really uses the language of the informational standard. Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over the course of a text. The literary side of the standard will key in on characters, settings, major events, and theme. The informational side of the standard doesn’t stray much from “individuals, events, and ideas” in its language of details.
As I delved into analyzing both standards at the same time, I wondered whether I would find more similarities or more differences. As I thought about this idea, I realized that nuances within a text type and comparison were a lot for one post. So, I’ve broken them up into a few posts, which you can access all at once. Or, you can let the ideas of one post simmer before delving into the horizontal alignment of literary and informational texts.
Reading Standard 3 Informational Text
Unlike the literary standards, the informational standards read in much more standard, logical progression of skills. Perhaps, this explains the closer wording connection to the anchor standard. These standards build similarly on refining, defining, and adding nuances at lower grade levels, which are then replaced with broader, general terms like “complex set” at grades 11/12.
What do you notice changing between grade levels?
What simplified language occurs that is built upon specific, detailed language at earlier grades?
Analyze a complex set of ideas or sequence of events and explain how specific individuals, ideas, or events interact and develop over the course of the text.
Analyze how the author unfolds an analysis or series of ideas or events, including the order in which the points are made, how they are introduced and developed, and the connections that are drawn between them.
Analyze how a text makes connections among and distinctions between individuals, ideas, or events (e.g., through comparisons, analogies, or categories).
Analyze the interactions between individuals, events, and ideas in a text (e.g., how ideas influence individuals or events, or how individuals influence ideas or events).
Analyze in detail how a key individual, event, or idea is introduced, illustrated, and elaborated in a text (e.g., through examples or anecdotes).
Explain the relationships or interactions between two or more individuals, events, ideas, or concepts in a historical, scientific, or technical text based on specific information in the text.
Explain events, procedures, ideas, or concepts in a historical, scientific, or technical text, including what happened and why, based on specific information in the text.
Describe the relationship between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text, using language that pertains to time, sequence, and cause/effect.
Describe the connection between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text.
Describe the connection between two individuals, events, ideas, or pieces of information in a text.
With prompting and support, describe the connection between two individuals, events, ideas, or pieces of information in a text.
Something that I noticed is how the students are directed to specific things that a type of text does predominantly at grade 3. Then, at grade 4, the standard returns to the general term “events, procedures, ideas, or concepts” with a hope that the students have their grade 3 building blocks to know that procedures often happen in technical texts not historical texts. I wonder how much this aligns with our thinking of ideas and text types. Or, do teachers at later grades know that there was an explicit link in 3rd grade between the text type and the type of detail found?
Ready for more? Check out the alignment within a grade level and classroom visual post up next.