Disciplinary Literacy: How it Started…How it’s Going

Uncategorized

How it Started

Once upon a time, there was an educational concept called disciplinary literacy. It changed and grew over time, experienced some setbacks, yet still offered hope for a better educational future for adolescent learners. Since this is a blog post about literacy, we may as well use story structure to our advantage–setting, characters, events, and even a little bit of conflict along the way. Like many stories (but certainly not all), it will be told in time order and according to the narrator’s understanding. For this reason, I hope that you will forgive any errors of fact or omissions.

While our story begins in 2008, it is only possible due to previous efforts of a wide cast of characters focused on researching literacy across many, many decades. For our purposes, however, we will only rewind to 2008. Prior to 2008, literacy was commonly understood as the ability to read and write in varied contexts, with an emphasis on the ability to decode texts and use information effectively. Efforts to support and extend students’ literacy abilities focused on reading and writing across the content areas, with slogans such as “all teachers are teachers of reading and writing.” While this understanding of literacy is certainly accurate, it is also incomplete. Timothy and Cynthia Shanahan published “Teaching Disciplinary Literacy to Adolescents: Rethinking Content-Area Literacy” in 2008, seeking to articulate the idea of a literacy progression from basic literacy to intermediate literacy and finally to disciplinary literacy. In this work, they highlighted distinct literacy practices required in disciplines such as history, science, and mathematics. For example, scientific fields value precision, technical vocabulary, and the interpretation of data and visual representations. History involves sourcing, contextualizing, and corroborating documents to construct narratives about the past. In mathematics, experts rely on symbolic representations, concise explanations, and logical reasoning. Within the field of literature studies, there is an emphasis on exploring multiple representations, figurative language, and themes. Their article called for teachers to explicitly model and scaffold the reading and writing practices of their disciplines.

However, literacy exists within interactions among the learner, task, and context. Enter the work of Elizabeth Birr Moje, who co-authored “The Complex World of Adolescent Literacy: Myths, Motivations, and Mysteries” in 2008 with Melanie Overby, Nicole Tysvaer, and Karen Morris. This work dispelled the myth that adolescents were not engaging in reading outside of school and articulated the need to connect students’ interests with academic literacy tasks by naming that youth are motivated to read texts that resonate with their personal interests, social identities, and cultural background. Building upon this work, Moje published “Foregrounding the Disciplines in Secondary Literacy Teaching and Learning: A Call for Change,” which advocated for developing disciplinary literacy instructional programs. This call emphasized that disciplinary literacy can provide all students with access to the specialized knowledge, skills, and practices of various fields, thus promoting educational equity.

As energy grew around the new concept of disciplinary literacy, additional researchers entered the scene. Instead of providing a broad definition of disciplinary literacy, some researchers offered explorations of particular components of disciplinary literacy. For example, Zhihui Fang and Mary J. Schleppegrell introduced the role of functional language analysis as a tool for educators to help students navigate complex disciplinary texts in 2010 with “Disciplinary Literacies Across Content Areas: Supporting Secondary Reading Through Functional Language Analysis” in 2010. Suggestions for application in various content areas include the following:

  • Science: Functional language analysis can help students unpack dense noun phrases and technical terms in order to understand complex concepts.
  • History: Analyzing the use of passive voice and nominalizations can reveal how historical events are presented and interpreted.
  • Mathematics: Understanding the precise language and symbolic representation aids in comprehending mathematical reasoning.

Also published in 2010, “Reading in the Disciplines: The Challenges of Adolescent Literacy” provided further insight into the specific literacy demands across various academic disciplines, contrasting content-area and disciplinary literacy examples. Additional ideas explored in the report include naming the difficulty that many students face as they transition from foundational and intermediate literacy skills to the advanced literacy demands in secondary schools; this difficulty is often compounded by increasing text complexity and assumptions that students already possess the skills needed to engage with complex texts. Researchers Carol D. Lee and Anika Spratley contributed to this publication and other research over time.

While many researchers were engaged in research and publication regarding disciplinary literacy over the next five years, the field was still lacking in a unifying framework that offered the promise of shifting educators’ overall approach to instruction in pedagogy. In 2015, Moje published “Doing and Teaching Disciplinary Literacy with Adolescent Learners: A Social and Cultural Enterprise.” This article provided the unifying structure that was sorely needed in the field–a teaching heuristic characterized by the 4Es: engage (engage students’ interest), elicit/engineer (identify existing skills), examine (guide students to critically examine texts, problems, or data), and evaluate (help students assess the quality of their work and thinking). This heuristic articulated not only the role of engaging adolescents in meaningful work aligned to their lives and community needs, but also the role of educators in planning for intentional instructional practices that apprentice students into the types of cognitive practices valued in various discourse communities.

Research continued after 2015, with many researchers digging deeper into the specific ways of not only reading and writing, but also speaking, listening, viewing, and thinking in various academic disciplines. While Sam Wineburg began researching the role of literacy within the field of history well before 2015, his work continues to be considered essential for educators in the field. As previously mentioned, the work of Fang and Schleppegrell focused on the literacies in scientific fields, along with Annemarie Palinscar and others. Deborah Ball, Judit Moschkovich, and Beth Herbel-Eisenmann provided insights into the intersection of language, literacy, and mathematics as well. Across the wide body of research into the concept of disciplinary, several key elements emerged:

  • Focusing on the language and literacy demands valued in various academic disciplines and professions, with a goal of making such literacy expectations visible to students through modeling.
  • Shifting toward student-centered learning for authentic purposes and audiences, with the teacher serving as the knowledgeable other, scaffolding and facilitating students’ learning.
  • Developing content knowledge alongside epistemological knowledge (understanding the ways disciplines construct and validate knowledge).

With such valiant research efforts, a reader might expect widespread implementation of disciplinary literacy. However, this was not the case. In many middle- and high-school settings, teaching content without attending to the literacy demands continued to be the status quo. Why was this the case? Perhaps it was due to the misunderstanding that disciplinary literacy was the “pinnacle” of literacy development, and therefore, not within the purview of “typical” or “struggling” learners. Perhaps it was the belief that disciplinary literacy approaches were simply a newly-branded version of content-area literacy approaches. Possibly educators were still struggling to identify what it might look like to align secondary settings to better support disciplinary literacy.

And, of course, there was a crisis called the COVID-19 pandemic that most certainly played a key role in this story. Nevertheless, the work continued.

How it’s Going

It is not a secret that, historically, key players in academia have tended to identify as White, upper-middle-class scholars. Unfortunately, this has prevented society from having a nuanced understanding of areas of study. Thankfully, we are starting to see broader representation in academic research of disciplinary literacy, both in terms of the students and educators serving as the primary focus of research efforts, as well as in terms of the researchers themselves. Since our story is a short story, we will only introduce a few such researchers here.

In “Culturally Sustaining Disciplinary Literacy for Bi/Multilingual Learners: Creating a Translanguaging Social Studies Classroom,” Garcia and Schleppegrell (2021) explore the intersections among disciplinary literacy approaches and culturally sustaining pedagogy; specifically, high-quality disciplinary literacy learning opportunities across subject areas that engage students in critically examining the world around them, interrogating accepted knowledge, contributing their own perspectives to shape that knowledge, and sustaining and developing the literacies needed to do this work.

Published in 2022 by Susan Watts-Taffe and colleagues, “Disciplinary Literacy in Action: High School Students Doing Research for Change” describes how disciplinary literacy practices were enacted among youth within the context of Youth Built Change, a science based program incorporating principles of Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR). Highlighting two YPAR projects, one conducted in a predominantly Black and Latino/a suburban school and one conducted in a predominantly White rural school, specific examples of the disciplinary literacy practices of Believing, Knowing, Doing, and Communicating are illustrated.

Rachael Gabriel, a professor of literacy education at the University of Connecticut, has made significant contributions to the field of disciplinary literacy through her research and publications. Her 2023 book, Doing Disciplinary Literacy: Teaching Reading and Writing Across the Content Areas, emphasized the importance of engaging students as active participants in the authentic activities of each content area, such as conducting experiments in science, analyzing primary sources in history, or solving real-world problems in mathematics. In addition to offering practical suggestions for educators on implementing disciplinary literacy, Gabriel’s body of work integrates culturally sustaining pedagogies and neurodiversity inclusion within literacy approaches.

What’s Next

Our story doesn’t end here. Longstanding researchers in the area of disciplinary literacy, Christina L. Dobbs, Megin Charner-Laird, Jacy Ippolito, and Christine Montecillo Leider, recently published Critical Disciplinary Literacy: An Equity-Driven and Culturally Responsive Approach to Disciplinary Learning and Teaching. This book introduces a new theory of CDL that combines critical and disciplinary literacy approaches into a cohesive framework. It remains to be seen what sort of impact this work might have on the widespread implementation of disciplinary literacy.

All stories are certainly affected by the events that do happen, but they are equally affected by the events that did not happen. Our story is no different. There has not yet been a deep focus on defining disciplinary literacy in English language arts beyond literary analysis up to this point. Perhaps a new cast of characters will enter the field in the coming years, providing rich nuance to our current understanding. Research into the impact of COVID-19 on learners’ cognition and motivation and disciplinary literacy approaches might also add to our story.

Regardless, our story of disciplinary literacy is far from finished. What started in 2008 with the goal of articulating literacy practices beyond generic, content-area approaches has progressed to a varied field of study seeking to provide a deep understanding of specific sub-categories of disciplinary literacy study. To Be Continued…

References

Moje, E. B., Overby, M., Tysvaer, N., & Morris, K. (2008). The complex world of adolescent literacy: Myths, motivations, and mysteries. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 107–154. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.78.1.54468j6204x24157

Dobbs, C. L., Leider, C. M., Ippolito, J., & Charner-Laird, M. (2024). Critical disciplinary literacy: An equity-driven and culturally responsive approach to disciplinary learning and teaching. Routledge.

Fang, Z., & Schleppegrell, M. J. (2010). Disciplinary literacies across content areas: Supporting secondary reading through functional language analysis. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(7), 587–597. https://doi.org/10.1598/jaal.53.7.6

Gabriel, R. (2023). Doing disciplinary literacy: Teaching reading and writing across the content areas. Teachers College Press.

Garcia, M. H., & Schleppegrell, M. J. (2021). Culturally sustaining disciplinary literacy for bi/multilingual learners: Creating a translanguaging social studies classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 64(4), 449–454. https://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jaal.1129

Lee, C. D., Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The challenges of adolescent literacy. Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Moje, E. B. (2008). Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(2), 96–107. https://doi.org/10.1598/jaal.52.2.1

Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40–59. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.78.1.v62444321p602101

Watts-Taffe, S., Vaughn, L. M., & Jacquez, F. (2022). Disciplinary literacy in action: High school students doing research for change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 65(4), 331–341. https://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jaal.1211  

About the Author

Jenelle Williams is a Literacy Consultant within the Leadership and Continuous Improvement unit at Oakland Schools, an intermediate school district supporting the 28 districts in Oakland County, Michigan. She joined the organization in 2017 following 18 years of experience in public schools at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. She has served as a classroom teacher, IB Middle Years Programme Coordinator, teacher leader, and educational technology coach. An IB Educator and Examiner since 2013, Jenelle leads professional learning workshops and marks e-assessments for the International Baccalaureate Organization. She holds an Education Specialist in Leadership degree and a Master’s degree in Reading and Language Arts through Oakland University. In addition, Jenelle serves as an Adjunct Professor in Grand Valley State University’s Graduate Program and a co-editor of The Michigan Reading Journal, a publication from the Michigan Reading Association. Jenelle is passionate about supporting teachers, building leaders, and central office administrators in the area of secondary literacy, and she is especially excited to be able to support Michigan’s work around disciplinary literacy through her role as Co-Chair of the statewide Disciplinary Literacy Task Force. She can be reached at jenelle.williams@oakland.k12.mi.us, and on Twitter at @JenelleWilliam6 and @GELN612Literacy.

Taking a Leap of Faith: From Content Area Literacy to Disciplinary Literacy

Uncategorized

If you are reading this, you are probably an educator like me; your expertise is in the field of education. As we studied to be teachers, we also had to take other courses as well and had to comprehend challenging texts in those courses. It’s possible that these texts looked like a foreign language at times; they did for me!  Attaching meaning to texts in each discipline was unique, and hopefully, your teachers were like mine, where they combined disciplinary literacy practices with content area literacy strategies as a part of their instructional process. [In general, content area literacy is the use of reading strategies across disciplines to comprehend what you read in any discipline, such as how summarization is a skill that can be applied regardless of content or field] These strategies blend into disciplinary literacy as content-area teachers begin to adapt the reading strategies for their specific discipline so that students are reading and writing as experts. For instance, while students in all disciplines can annotate a text as they read, how they annotate, and the types of codes they use will differ based on discipline. So, where does this leave disciplinary literacy in my eyes, and what does this mean for education?

Too often, we misunderstand the similarities and differences between content-area and disciplinary literacy, with people thinking they are disparate terms. While content-area literacy strategies support student comprehension, disciplinary literacy practices guide students to read, think, and communicate like experts in each discipline. However, within the disciplines, texts are specialized; vocabulary is precise. Reading strategies must morph to meet the challenge of reading and engaging with these diverse texts to move beyond surface-level or basic comprehension. The ability to read and communicate as an insider of certain disciplines results from reasoning, sociocultural practices, and engaging in inquiry as appropriate to the discipline (Carnegie Learning, 2024). These abilities grow stronger with teacher support, and disciplinary learning is practiced as students engage in the process of learning. The result is that teachers aren’t telling students what to do, what to know, and what to think; they are giving students the resources to acquire knowledge and the opportunities to apply it in new situations.

Personal Reflection of my Childhood Learning

And while I know this information now, I did not always understand the need for content area and disciplinary literacy. Therefore, I decided to reflect on my literacy teacher’s journey, and I invite you to think about what you remember about your journey, too. For instance, did you listen to someone read to you?  Did you tell your own story to go with the illustrations in a picture book?  Did you sing the alphabet and then match sounds with letters representing that sound?  A healthy balance of these actions develops decoding and comprehension proficiency in the primary grades.

I learned about purposeful reading in the upper elementary grades—for entertainment or information. The text changed format, and its complexity grew. The way I read changed depending on what I was reading. My teachers modeled reading strategies for learning key vocabulary terms and for remembering complex concepts. Some teachers modeled unique practices specific to the discipline.

Personal Reflection as a Teacher Educator

Moving forward in my reflection, I reminisce about my teacher-educator experiences and consider the necessity of blending content area and disciplinary literacy so that all students can engage with their learning.

For almost ten years, I taught a required literacy recertification course, Content Area Literacy for Middle and High School Teachers.  Ironically, I was also teaching college students who had graduated from high school and were underprepared for English Composition or College Algebra. I found myself working to develop literacy proficiency from two perspectives. It was enlightening. My college students demonstrated a lack of basic comprehension of text (content-area literacy); my in-service teachers taught through PowerPoint presentations, not expecting students to engage in a wide variety of complex text or purposeful learning that is part of the discipline (disciplinary literacy). Their students were graduating with the information teachers had vetted, not the ability to acquire and construct information independently.

About partway through those years, I became acutely aware that my teachers’ course was too focused on content-area literacy and not giving disciplinary literacy the attention it deserved. I had begun searching for a new textbook; the recent publications no longer used the two terms synonymously. My approach to content area reading and writing needed to make this change also. I began to differentiate content area literacy from disciplinary literacy with my in-service teachers while maintaining a blended approach using both. At the same time, my college expected me to teach integrated reading and writing to my underprepared college students as preparation for the discipline-specific texts they would encounter in their programs of study. I needed to blend the reading process, the writing process, content area literacy, and disciplinary literacy into an instructional model for constructing meaning from a wide variety of texts, both print and nonprint, for a wide variety of disciplines.

Disciplinary Literacy in Action

It appeared to me that many of my college students lacked the background knowledge and prior experiences to approach complex, disciplinary texts. We used class time for discussions, building shared knowledge to attack complex text. I layered key terms onto students’ vocabulary as they “read” images and other appropriate nonprint texts I had curated to elicit discussion.  I guided their responses with open-ended questions, urging students to view the topic as an expert: Who might use this information? For what purposes?

Our primary reading source was an anthology of disciplinary texts: art, chemistry, history, psychology, biology, and literature. Students could apply content-area strategies while reading independently to grasp the general understanding of what they were reading. They discovered that reading diagrams was important in chemistry, timelines in history, examples or case studies in psychology, figurative language in literature, and images in art. Each discipline also carried its own key terms; familiar words took on new meanings appropriate to the discipline.

Responding to the text in each discipline became more than a test or writing a summary.  Again, I used an open-ended question to guide students’ responses; what will you do with your new knowledge?  Their thoughts, connections, and curiosities provided opportunities to demonstrate their understanding of real-world situations. According to Angela M. Banks, a doctoral student at Central Connecticut University, reading proficiency and disciplinary knowledge go beyond comprehension; they require complex skills: analysis, synthesis, organization, and evaluation (2024.) These skills are evidence of disciplinary literacy.

The Takeaway

My “underprepared” college students may have missed the high school experience of engaging in disciplinary literacy across their classrooms.  They may or may not have been using content-area literacy strategies to gain a general understanding of a text. However, my class taught them how to blend the two to be more proficient college readers and writers. Providing this experience prepared them to construct meaningful information through complex text. Content-area literacy doesn’t end as disciplinary literacy begins; it blends into disciplinary literacy as students build competence and confidence to think like an expert.

Because the term disciplinary literacy is ever-evolving, I encourage you to return often to LiD’s blog as its writers continue to explore disciplinary literacy and what it looks like in the required and elective courses that students are choosing.

For additional information on the difference between CAL and DL, I refer you to

What Is Disciplinary Literacy and Why Is It Important?  Carnegie Learning. https://www.carnegielearning.com/blog/what-is-disciplinary-literacy/#:~:text=Disciplinary%20literacy%20is%20about%20reading,in%20important%20ways%20for%20students. 

Shanahan on Literacy, https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/disciplinary-literacy-the-basics

Reference

Banks, A.M. (2024). Training Secondary Teachers in Content-Disciplinary Literacy: A Blended Model for Meeting the Literacy Needs of Students in the Secondary Classroom. https://www.proquest.com/openview/da444e8e3146381b5d090c2338ae4a2c/1?cbl=18750&diss=y&pq-origsite=gscholar

About the Author

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image.png

After over 20 years in higher education, Charlene Aldrich officially retired in 2024.  She remains connected to the literacy community through Literacy in the Disciplines, 6-12; she spends her spare time at Pet Helpers in Charleston, SC, a no-kill shelter for fostering and adopting dogs, cats, and small animals. 

The Science of Reading: From Full-on Belief to Skepticism

Uncategorized

In 2021, while teaching 5th grade in an elementary school in North Carolina, the Science of Reading movement took over NC. From 2021 until 2023, I was required by the state to complete the two-year-long LETRS (Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling) program by Lexia Learning. While many teachers grumbled about the intensive training, I was often the positive one saying that I enjoyed the training and had learned so much from it. I was amazed at the story of how Mississippi drastically increased their reading scores after teachers completed this training and implemented it in their elementary classrooms. Hearing this information from esteemed scholars, I was optimistic about what this could do for NC schools. Unfortunately, I had fallen prey to the narrative that the LETRS way is THE only way.

Flash forward two school years, and I am now a Certified Reading Specialist working in a middle school with readers in grades 6-8. I earned a Master’s Degree in Reading and Literacy Education which taught me to research for myself. Through my program, I learned about the Reading Wars that have been going on for decades, which frequently change how reading is taught in elementary schools and how this feeds into middle school (like using the Science of Reading approach to help those who are not on grade level). However, before taking masters courses, I had not previously learned to question things and read about both sides, at least not when it came to recommended instructional practices. I listened to what I was told to do by my peers and administrators and went with it (and let’s be real, I still do in many ways since I want to keep my job, but I do it with a new outlook and include other practices, too). I trusted what I was told by those at higher levels than me, like most of us do. I think very highly of those who work above me and didn’t stop to consider that they were also doing what they were told.

So, what is there to question about the Science of Reading? Dr. Paul Thomas of Furman University states in his article series We Teach English in Times of Perpetual Crisis, that “Currently, no peer-reviewed, experimental/quasi-experimental studies show LETRS training improves student achievement in reading” (2024, pg. 16). Additionally, much of the research shared at the training connects to the founders and funders with only a few external data sources and studies. This is important if the goal is to say that one type of reading instruction, documented by the science of data exploration and analysis, is better than others.

That is not to say that LETRS is all bad. There are some GREAT pieces of information and strategies used in LETRS. For instance, LETRS taught me teaching cohesive devices to connect ideas in complex sentences, explicit vocabulary strategies, and comprehension strategies that can be used in upper elementary and middle grades. However, and this is a big revelation here, I have come to realize that this does not mean it is right for every student, in every classroom, across all grade levels. LETRS often provides a one-size-fits-all approach to teaching reading, and this is not an equitable way to teach all students who may or may not need all aspects of LETRS instruction. I also wonder about the types of texts emphasized in this program and how that impacts all students. Only using decodable texts that match a phonics lesson leaves out the opportunity for using culturally responsive texts that reach and reflect diverse students and their experiences, especially when thinking about this implemented through the middle grades. These lessons often do not consider linguistic diversity such as various dialects or accents, either. And, I dare say they even leave out our more advanced readers who do not need repetitive phonics daily. Therefore, I am learning how to question things, even when they sound good at first, and to explore potential biases with an awareness that I need to use critical literacy skills when I read articles and research all things connected to reading and the Reading Wars..

Through conversations about this topic with a friend, I started thinking about how I teach my ELA classes. Sure, there may be some strategies that LETRS taught me that are beneficial to some students, but there is much more that needs to be taught, especially at the secondary level. There are countless articles out there about the best way to teach reading (hence, the term ‘Reading Wars’ that indicates the back and forth of this), but the truly best way (in my humble opinion) is to take a little bit from everything. From my experience, teachers in the schools I have worked in ARE doing this! We read books, teach morphology, vocabulary, comprehension strategies, how to understand things in context, and more, intentionally thinking about the content and standard requirements and the students sitting in our classrooms. When it comes down to it, teachers are doing what they are supposed to be doing…which brings me back to the Science of Reading movement. One of Dr. Thomas’s main concerns with the Science of Reading is how it paints a narrative of ineffective teachers and takes away teacher autonomy. While the phonics-based LETRS, one enactment of the Science of Reading movement, may benefit K-2 classrooms, upper elementary may be better off using a more differentiated approach. Of course, it depends on the make-up of students in the classroom, and that’s where our teacher expertise comes in. We know our students. We know what works best for them, and we should be trusted to teach them in an equitable manner using a variety of approaches that cover all aspects of reading.

At this point, you may wonder why I wrote this blog post, as it shares my story of learning. I hope to encourage teachers to research for themselves when new policies and initiatives are introduced in their state. This is not to say to go against them but to teach with an outlook that understands both sides of the coin and multiple narratives regarding what works best for your students. Being informed on the good and the bad of policies set into place by others will allow us to teach with an equitable lens for all learners.

References:

Thomas, P.L. (2024, September). We teach English in times of perpetual crisis: The media continue to misread teaching reading and literacy. English Journal, 114(1), 14-19. https://publicationsncte.org/content/journals/10.58680/ej2024114114

About the Author

Olivia Moore works at East McDowell Middle School as a Reading Specialist. Her undergraduate and Master’s degrees are from East Carolina University – Go Pirates!! Her passion is reading, and she is determined to help all of her students feel confident with reading. Those who don’t enjoy reading just haven’t found the right book yet!

Are You Financially Literate?

Uncategorized
Investor's hand holding a coin with a tree growing on the concept of financial and investment success.

As we close out 2024, it seems fitting that we visit another recent policy that touches on the overall literacy of our students – fiscal responsibility.  Dr. Kavin Ming offers us reminders that explicit instruction in specific topics is necessary for students on their transition to young adulthood. How do the courses in your school systems measure up?

Why Financial Literacy Matters            

I remember my first experience with credit as clearly as if it were yesterday.  At my first college event, there were booths everywhere with vendors inviting me over to their tables.  I could get a t-shirt, or a tote bag, or many other goodies if I signed up for a credit card.  I never had a credit card before, and I did not know how credit worked.  I wanted the gift, and so I signed up…    

As of December 2023, 25 states require students to take a financial literacy course for high school graduation.  Financial literacy is a vital skill that young and older adults should strive to master. It empowers individuals to make informed decisions about their finances, which can lead to a more secure and prosperous future. In this blog, we will explore key aspects of financial literacy that young adults should be aware of, including managing debt, using credit cards wisely, creating and sticking to a budget, saving for the future, and responsible spending.  We also discuss the financial literacy gap and ways to bridge that gap.

Understanding Debt

Debt can be a significant obstacle to financial well-being if not managed properly. Young adults often accumulate various forms of debt, including student loans, credit card debt, and car loans. It’s essential to understand the following concepts regarding debt:

  1. Types of Debt:
    • Good Debt: This includes loans for education or investments that have the potential to increase your future earning potential, such as a mortgage for a home or a business loan.
    • Bad Debt: Debt incurred for non-essential items like luxury goods or vacations, often with high-interest rates.
  2. Interest Rates: Pay close attention to the interest rates associated with your debts. High-interest debts can quickly snowball and become unmanageable. Aim to pay off high-interest debts as soon as possible.
  3. Credit Score: Your credit score is a numerical representation of your creditworthiness. Paying bills on time, managing credit responsibly, and maintaining a good credit history can lead to a higher credit score, which can help you secure better loan terms and interest rates.

Using Credit Cards Wisely

Credit cards can be a double-edged sword. When used responsibly, they can offer convenience, rewards, and the opportunity to build credit. However, misuse can lead to financial troubles. Here’s what you need to know:

  1. Credit Card Basics: Understand the terms and conditions of your credit card, including the annual percentage rate (APR), credit limit, and fees. Avoid maxing out your credit card, as this can negatively impact your credit score.
  2. Credit Score Impact: Make timely payments and keep your credit card balances low. These actions positively affect your credit score. Conversely, late payments and high credit card balances can harm your credit.
  3. Responsible Spending: Use credit cards for planned expenses that you can pay off in full each month. Avoid using them for impulse purchases or non-essential items. Only charge what you can afford to pay back.

Budgeting

Creating and sticking to a budget is a fundamental skill for managing your finances effectively. A budget helps you track income and expenses, ensuring you live within your means. Here’s how to get started:

  1. Income and Expenses: List all your sources of income and categorize your expenses. Be thorough and include everything from rent and utilities to entertainment and dining out.
  2. Set Financial Goals: Establish both short-term and long-term financial goals. These can include saving for an emergency fund, paying off debt, or saving for retirement.
  3. Track and Adjust: Monitor your spending regularly and adjust your budget as needed. Use apps or spreadsheets to make tracking easier. Staying on top of your finances will help you make informed decisions.

Saving for the Future

Saving money is a key component of financial literacy. It provides you with a financial safety net and enables you to build wealth over time. Here are some key points about saving:

  1. Emergency Fund: Prioritize building an emergency fund with at least three to six months’ worth of living expenses. This will protect you from unexpected financial setbacks, such as medical bills or job loss.
  2. Automate Savings: Set up automatic transfers to your savings account each month. This makes saving a habit and ensures that you consistently put money away.
  3. Invest for the Long Term: Consider investing in stocks, bonds, or retirement accounts like a 401(k) or IRA to grow your wealth over time. Start early to take advantage of compound interest.

Spending Wisely

Responsible spending is the final piece of the financial literacy puzzle. It’s about making conscious choices with your money to achieve your financial goals. Here’s how to be a wise spender:

  1. Differentiate Needs and Wants: Before making a purchase, ask yourself if it’s a necessity or a luxury. Prioritize needs over wants, but allow yourself some indulgences occasionally.
  2. Comparison Shopping: Research and compare prices before making significant purchases. Look for deals, discounts, and coupons to save money.
  3. Avoid Impulse Buying: Impulse purchases can quickly derail your budget. Implement a 24-hour rule: Wait a day before buying something non-essential. You may find that you no longer want it.

The Financial Literacy Gap

While financial literacy is crucial for everyone, there is a significant financial literacy gap that needs to be addressed. This gap disproportionately affects certain demographics, leading to financial disparities. Here are some key factors contributing to the financial literacy gap:

  1. Education: Access to quality financial education varies, and not everyone receives formal instruction in personal finance. This lack of education can lead to financial illiteracy.
  2. Income and Socioeconomic Status: Individuals with lower incomes often have limited access to financial resources and services, making it challenging to improve their financial literacy.
  3. Age: Young adults may lack the financial knowledge needed to make sound decisions, while older adults may struggle with adapting to evolving financial products and technology.
  4. Cultural and Ethnic Differences: Cultural and language barriers can hinder access to financial education and services, particularly among minority groups.
  5. Gender: Gender disparities in financial literacy persist, with women often having lower financial literacy scores than men.

Bridging the Financial Literacy Gap

To address the financial literacy gap, collective efforts are needed. Here are some strategies for bridging this gap:

  1. Accessible Education: Provide accessible financial education programs in schools and communities to reach individuals of all ages and backgrounds.
  2. Online Resources: Offer online resources, such as websites, videos, and apps, to make financial education easily accessible to everyone.
  3. Targeted Outreach: Develop targeted financial literacy programs for underserved communities, including low-income individuals and minority groups.
  4. Financial Inclusion: Promote financial inclusion by ensuring that everyone has access to affordable banking services and financial products.
  5. Advocacy and Policy: Advocate for policies that support financial education initiatives and protect consumers from predatory financial practices.

Conclusion

Financial literacy is a lifelong journey, and it’s crucial for young adults to start early. By understanding debt, using credit cards wisely, budgeting, saving for the future, and spending responsibly, you can take control of your financial destiny. Remember that financial literacy is a skill that can be continually improved through education, practice, and making informed decisions.

References:

  1. CapitalOne. (2024). What Are Credit Cards and How Do they Work? https://www.capitalone.com/learn-grow/money-management/how-credit-cards-work/
  2. CapitalOne. (2023). Good Debt vs. Bad Debt: What’s the Difference? https://www.capitalone.com/learn-grow/money-management/good-debt-vs-bad-debt/.
  3. CNBC. (2023). Here’s how much money you should have saved at every age. https://www.cnbc.com/select/savings-by-age/
  4. Forbes Advisor. (2024). Average Credit Card Debt Study 2023? https://www.forbes.com/advisor/credit-cards/average-credit-card-debt/.
  5. Forbes Advisor. (2022). How to Make a Budget: 5 Time-Tested Approaches. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/banking/how-to-make-a-budget-time-tested-approaches/
  6. Ramsey Solutions. (2023). Which States Require Financial Literacy for High School Students? https://www.ramseysolutions.com/financial-literacy/states-require-financial-literacy-in-high-school
  7. The Balance. (2022). 10 Tips for Using Your First Credit Card. https://www.thebalancemoney.com/tips-for-starting-out-with-credit-960187

About the Author

Dr. Kavin Ming is a Professor at Winthrop University in Rock Hill, SC. She is currently serving as the Department Chair in the Department of Curriculum and Pedagogy. She teaches undergraduate literacy methods courses and graduate content area literacy and practicum courses. Kavin’s research interests include at-risk student populations, culturally responsive pedagogy, content area literacy instruction, and multisensory teaching of literacy skills. Kavin can be contacted at mingk@winthrop.edu.

We Teach English in Times of Perpetual Crisis: Selling a Story of Reading (and Literacy)

Uncategorized

English-speaking countries are once again in the midst of another Reading War, and in the U.S., the “science of reading” (SOR) movement is taking center stage. This movement has led to intense media scrutiny of reading programs, teachers, and teacher education, as well as sweeping state-level legislation and mandates.

In our December 2024 webinar, P.L. Thomas explores the history of the Reading Wars, breaks down the key elements of the SOR movement, and highlights why these changes pose significant challenges for educators. From threats to teacher autonomy to the risk of overlooking individual student needs, this conversation is vital for all educators—not just those who teach beginning readers.

Watch the webinar below to better understand this pressing issue and its implications for the future of education.

About the Presenter

P.L. Thomas, Professor of Education (Furman University, Greenville SC), taught high school English in rural South Carolina before moving to teacher education. He is a former column editor for English Journal (National Council of Teachers of English) and author of How to End the Reading War and Serve the Literacy Needs of All Students (2nd ed.; IAP, 2022) and Teaching Writing as Journey, Not Destination: Essays Exploring What ‘Teaching Writing’ Means (IAP, 2019). NCTE named Thomas the 2013 George Orwell Award winner. He coedited (with Chris Goering) Critical Media Literacy and Fake News in Post-Truth America (Brill, 2018), receiving the 2019 Divergent Award for Excellence in 21st Century Literacies.

Follow his work @plthomasEdD and the becoming radical: https://radicalscholarship.wordpress.com/

We Teach English in Times of Perpetual Crisis: Selling a story of reading (and literacy)

Blog, Teaching

As a preview of his upcoming webinar, Dr. Paul Thomas shares compelling statistics and insight into historical reading wars. His response? Encouraging teacher voice in light of legislation that is poised to erase teacher autonomy and serving the individual needs of students.

Dr. Thomas is a Professor of Education at Furman University in rural South Carolina. His experience in teaching English in public schools preceded his tenure in higher education. He is widely published and the recipient of the George Orwell Award and Divergent Award for Excellence in 21st Century Literacies.

Click here to read his blog

Coaching Teachers in Disciplinary Literacy

Teaching, Webinar

Thanks to Dr. Littlejohn and Dr. Rogers for sharing their insights on how to grow disciplinary literacy through coaching.

About the authors

Dr. Wanda Littlejohn is a native of North Augusta, SC, and has 22 years’ experience in the field of education with a background in science. Currently, she is an InstructionalSpecialist at Carolina High School where she provides professional development for teachers. Her passion is working with
educators to provide engaging and equitable learning experiences for students.

Dr. Fran Rogers is an experienced educator in Greenville, SC with a diverse background in middle school and high school education. She has served in various instructional positions at the school and district levels, including classroom teacher, instructional coach, and Secondary Academic Instructional Specialist.

Unlocking Literacy Across the Curriculum: Coaching Disciplinary Literacy

Blog, Teaching

Dr. Fran Rogers and Dr. Wanda Littlejohn

Literacy extends beyond English Language Arts (ELA) classrooms—it’s essential in every subject, from science to history, math, and the arts. Disciplinary literacy focuses on equipping students to read, write, and think like experts in each field. By integrating discipline-specific literacy strategies, we enhance student learning across all subjects. To support this, we can leverage Diane Sweeney’s Student-Centered Coaching Model, which shifts the focus from simply delivering content to achieving specific student outcomes.

But how can instructional coaches effectively guide teachers in incorporating disciplinary literacy strategies? By blending Student-Centered Coaching with co-planning, co-teaching, and insights from experts like Jim Knight and Elena Aguilar, we can create a powerful framework for elevating literacy instruction across disciplines.

What is Disciplinary Literacy?

Stephen Sawchuk in Education Week (2024) suggests that the concept of disciplinary literacy extends beyond simply reading and understanding the vocabulary associated with each content area. Implementing disciplinary literacy practices equips students with the skills needed to navigate and interpret the texts and concepts unique to each academic discipline. In an interview with Sawchuk, Tim Shanahan described disciplinary literacy as “the recognition that each field has a different body of text and different types of text that readers have to read, and that readers really have to have a different stance,” highlighting the need for specialized approaches to literacy. This goes beyond general reading comprehension; it’s about empowering students to approach science like scientists, history like historians, math like mathematicians, and art like artists. Each discipline has its own language, ways of thinking, and methods for analyzing and communicating ideas.

For example, scientists prioritize precision and evidence, historians emphasize sourcing and perspective, mathematicians focus on logical reasoning, and artists explore symbolism and creative interpretation. In ELA, students dive into analyzing themes, character development, and literary devices.

To effectively implement disciplinary literacy, educators must adopt approaches that prioritize student learning and mastery of discipline-specific skills. This is where good instructional coaching models become invaluable in driving meaningful progress.

Using Student-Centered Coaching to Drive Disciplinary Literacy

Diane Sweeney’s Student-Centered Coaching Model focuses on student learning rather than teacher performance. In this model, coaching centers on student work, using it to inform and guide the instruction provided by the teacher. It emphasizes setting student-centered goals, utilizing data to drive instruction, and measuring progress based on student outcomes. When applying this approach to disciplinary literacy, the question shifts from “What strategies can we teach?” to “How can we ensure students master the literacy skills specific to each discipline?”

To make this model actionable, we can draw on the coaching stances, dispositions, and stems from Jim Knight and Elena Aguilar to guide our work. This approach allows us to blend these frameworks in a way that supports teachers in integrating disciplinary literacy across content areas.  This link provides steps for Instructional Coaches to co-plan and co-teach with student-centered disciplinary literacy goals and various coaching approaches and dispositions in mind. This link provides possible Disciplinary Literacy coaching questions organized by discipline.

In his interview with Sawchuk, Tim Shanahan shared his experience co-teaching with a laboratory science teacher, highlighting the overwhelmingly positive response from students. To create similar positive learning moments, let us now explore specific examples of how disciplinary literacy can be applied across different content areas to enhance student learning through the Student-Centered Coaching Model.

Disciplinary Literacy Lessons Across Content Areas

1. English Language Arts (ELA): Analyzing Themes and Literary Devices

Student-Centered Goal Example: “Students will analyze how authors use literary devices to develop themes.”

Lesson Idea: Use Ray Bradbury’s The Pedestrian to explore symbolism. Co-plan a close reading where students annotate for the various literary devices and discuss their impact on the theme of isolation.

Coaching Tip: Co-teach by modeling a think-aloud on identifying literary devices, then observe students as they practice the skill.  Co-teach by modeling a think-aloud on word choice and its impact on theme then observe students as they practice using the assigned text.

2. History: Evaluating Primary Sources

Student-Centered Goal Example: “Students will analyze primary sources for bias and perspective.”

Lesson Idea: During a unit on the American Revolution, co-plan a lesson where students compare the Declaration of Independence with Loyalist responses.

Coaching Tip: Use a “One Teach, One Coach” approach. While the teacher leads a primary source analysis, the coach observes how students identify bias while progressing toward the learning target.

3. Science: Reading Technical Texts

Student-Centered Goal Example: “Students will extract key information from scientific articles.”

Lesson Idea: Co-plan a jigsaw activity where students read and summarize sections of a text on ecosystems, becoming “experts” on different parts. The students will then use a Claim, Evidence, and Reasoning graphic organizer to show their understanding of ecosystems.

Coaching Tip: Team-teach to model strategies for decoding complex vocabulary and text features and model how to write high-quality, scientific claims.

4. Math: Using Academic Vocabulary

Student-Centered Goal Example: “Students will use precise mathematical language in their explanations.”

Lesson Idea: Co-plan a lesson where students write about their problem-solving process using specific vocabulary.

Coaching Tip: Model how to incorporate academic language in explanations, then provide feedback as students practice.

Final Thoughts

By centering our coaching on the Student-Centered Coaching Model and incorporating insights from Jim Knight and Elena Aguilar, we can create a collaborative and empowering approach to disciplinary literacy. Knight (2019) emphasizes that, while collaborating with a coach, teachers should maintain significant autonomy over their learning. This allows teachers to engage meaningfully with their curricular goals. Additionally, Aguilar (2016) asserts that coaches should prioritize listening and allow teachers to drive the conversation. Through co-planning, co-teaching, and focusing on student outcomes, we ensure that literacy skills are integrated across disciplines, fostering deeper learning and student success.

Let’s continue to unlock the power of literacy across all classrooms—one co-planned lesson at a time. Happy coaching! If you would like to see a sample coaching cycle rooted in disciplinary literacy, click here. If you would like to see ways coaches can reflect on coaching practices that best support teachers in “making it stick,” read this blog.

Sources

Aguilar, E. (2016, September 27). 20 tips for new instructional coaches. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/blog/20-tips-new-instructional-coaches-elena-aguilar

Education Week. (2024, October). What is disciplinary literacy? Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/what-is-disciplinary-literacy/2024/10

Harris, Leanna. “How to Make Sure Coaching Sticks.” Student-Centered Coaching, 19 Nov. 2024, www.dianesweeney.com/how-to-make-sure-coaching-sticks/.

Knight, J. (2019, November 1). Why teacher autonomy is central to coaching success. Volume 77, Issue 3. Retrieved from https://ascd.org/el/articles/why-teacher-autonomy-is-central-to-coaching-success

Sweeney, D. (2011).  Student Centered Coaching:  A Guide for K-8 Coaches and Principals.  Thousand Oaks:  Corwin Press

About the authors:

Dr. Wanda Littlejohn has 24 years of experience in the field of education.  Currently, she is an Instructional Specialist at Carolina High School where she provides ongoing support and professional development for teachers.
Dr. Fran Rogers is an experienced educator in Greenville, SC with a diverse background in middle school and high school education. She has served in various instructional positions at the school and district levels, including classroom teacher, instructional coach, and Secondary Academic Instructional Specialist.

Deep Learning to Inform Culturally Responsive/Sustaining Teaching

Teaching

Judy Paulick, University of Virginia

Students’ families and communities have shaped them into who they are and what they bring with them to their classrooms. When teachers access those vast resources and connect curricula, teaching, and classroom communities to students’ cultures and experiences, students thrive and so do their teachers. But learning about students—especially beyond surface-level information—can be challenging. And figuring out how to translate what’s been learned into culturally responsive/sustaining teaching can be equally challenging.

               The most important part of this process is understanding what, exactly, culture is—our own and our students’. Yes, culture is holidays, clothing, music, language, and food. And all of that is important—essential, even—to who people are. Representing and nurturing those aspects of students’ identities in the classroom is necessary. But culture also includes things like how we engage in conversation, how we communicate nonverbally, our notions of time, ideas about competition and cooperation, and what is seen as fair or honest. It’s knowing and understanding these kinds of things about ourselves and others—and understanding that there are multiple “good” and “right” ways of doing all of these things—that undergirds culturally responsive/sustaining teaching. Imagine, for example, you have a student who will not look you in the eye when you are speaking to them or another student who talks over their classmates during discussion. Mainstream, dominant cultural models might cast those students as disrespectful, when their families and communities have taught them that these actions are actually respectful. When teachers simply interpret behavior through that mainstream, dominant lens, they are missing out.

               So how do we learn about students’ (and their families’ and communities’) assets and cultural models? First, we need to be deeply reflective about who we are. What are our cultural models—what do we view as “good” and “normal”? What are our biases? And how might we shift our thinking to be broader and more inclusive? Next, we need to engage with families and in communities. Family engagement is not simply about families engaging with and in schools; it is also about teachers engaging with families and communities beyond the bounds of the school. Asset-framed, relationship-building home visits with families are one very powerful way to center families’ stories, learn about their cultural models, and redistribute power. The Parent Teacher Home Visit organization (pthvp.org) provides an excellent framework and resources for getting started with home visiting. Teachers can also have conversations with families on the sidelines of students’ games and recitals. Teachers can attend community events, visit houses of worship, and otherwise spend time in the community. Learning people’s and communities’ stories—through conversations, books, blogs, etc.—is key to the work of building trust and learning about assets and cultural models. The learning is ongoing and invigorating work; it is never truly done. Cultures are dynamic and shifting, and there is always more to learn.

Once teachers have begun to learn about students’ assets and cultural models, they can more robustly inform culturally responsive/sustaining teaching. Culturally responsive/sustaining teaching, according to scholars like Django Paris and Geneva Gay, does the following: honors students’ multilingualism and multidialectism and values communities’ language practices; incorporates students’/families’/communities’ assets and cultural models into teaching (planning, instruction, assessment, classroom community) and nurtures those assets and cultural models; and develops students’ awareness of and activism against injustice. I have seen content area teachers engage in the following culturally responsive/sustaining practices, and there are countless others:

  • Explicitly incorporating and highlighting the contributions of scientists, mathematicians, politicians, etc. from students’ cultural and identity groups and underrepresented identities;
  • Exploring/critiquing issues of justice related to the content area and students’ cultural and identity groups;
  • Including students in decision-making about activities, assessment, and the classroom community;
  • Inviting community members to support lessons, share ideas, etc.;
  • Incorporating home languages and dialects whenever possible (e.g., translanguaging).

Where to begin? With curiosity and humility. Students, families, and communities are an endless source of wealth and inspiration if we are able to see it!

Judy Paulick is an associate professor of elementary education at the University of Virginia’s School of Education and Human Development. Before becoming a teacher educator, she was a classroom teacher in Compton, CA and Boulder, CO. Her research and teaching focuses on preparing teachers to engage with families and communities and use what they learn to inform culturally sustaining language arts instruction.

Follow LiD, 6-12 on social media