Supporting MLs Through Disciplinary Literacy: A Practical Guide for Teachers

Uncategorized

by Carrie Rieder

You’ve learned about disciplinary literacy and are convinced that this is the best path of success for your students. You’ve been to professional development, read books, found this blog…you are all in! 

Or perhaps you are an administrator, embarking upon a school-wide plan to focus on disciplinary literacy. The first day of school arrives, and you greet students as they come through the door. As you smile and say hello, inwardly you realize that you might have forgotten about one not-so-small thing: several of your students are new to the country and have only just  begun learning English. 

Your anxiety increases when you have a conversation with your ESOL teacher and she explains that one of the students only attended school sporadically, and had no formal education for the past two years during the family’s transition to the United States. 

What now? You’ve planned so many exciting, challenging lessons centered around the specific characteristics of your content language. Can the students even learn that? Should you just give them something else? Do nothing at all?

 I’m here to tell you that  not only is it possible, but it is beneficial and necessary to teach disciplinary literacy to your newcomer multilingual learners (MLs)

I’ve been working with and living beside multilingual learners of all ages and language levels for 20 years. For the past four years at Carolina High School, I have focused on newcomer MLs and SLIFE (Students with Limited or Interrupted Formal Education). As a co-teacher, and now a sheltered class teacher,  I’ve used many strategies that teach and expose my students to the disciplinary literacy required in English Language Arts.

 Accommodating for these students doesn’t have to be time-consuming or daunting. I can give you insight into the best mindset and strategies to use in general education classes to ensure that every student in the room can access what is taught.


Accommodation is not “dumbing-down”

As educators, we know that we are expected to teach with rigor and high expectations. Accommodating lower-level MLs in your classroom does not remove rigor or high expectations. MLs are still expected to do challenging work, achieve success, and grow academically. The only thing you are lowering is the language load. 

You might be familiar with cognitive load theory. The application of cognitive load theory to teaching means that teachers need to design lessons that reduce confusion and overwhelm so that students can focus on actually understanding and learning content. 

For MLs, this means reducing the amount and complexity of the language so that students can focus their energy on learning new concepts or practicing skills. We are not changing the destination—-we are simply paving the road.

Accommodations—-often outlined in  ML language acquisition plans—-are guidelines for engaging MLs in disciplinary literacy at their level of English language proficiency. They are not a rigid set of rules. These supports allow the MLs to reach the same standards as English-proficient students. Many states even include “best practice” strategies that work for all students—-because good teaching is good teaching.

Accommodating for your MLs can feel overwhelming. Language acquisition plans can seem lengthy or vague. I encourage you to start your mindset shift by reading an ML language acquisition plan, start to finish—-not just the list of accommodations. Doing this will open your mind to what it really means to support MLs in your classroom.


Accommodation is not an afterthought

Planning a unit takes time and attention to detail. I often see teachers get to the end of a unit plan and realize that they must accommodate for their MLs. After investing so much energy into the core content, there’s little left to adapt it. The result? A translated test or reliance on digital translation tools.

But if your goal is to teach the language of your discipline, translation won’t be enough. It won’t help students develop the academic language needed to access the content. Not to mention—-this assumes a high level of native language literacy, that students may not have. There is a better way.

The best way to accommodate is to start from the beginning—-by pairing each standards-based learning target with a language target.

  • Learning targets focus on the knowledge or skills that students must master.
  • Language targets focus on the language students need to access and express that knowledge.

Together, they tell students what they are learning and how they’ll use language to show it. This is a key step in making disciplinary literacy accessible at any level of English proficiency.

Step 1: Accommodate Input

Students receive new information through instruction and texts. As you plan your unit, ask:

  • Where will ML students struggle with language?
  • How complex are the texts?
  • Which lessons or texts are essential for content mastery?

Feeling overwhelmed? Take a breath. Like riding a bike, the best way to learn to accommodate is to start—and keep trying.

Step 2: Accommodate Output

Once you have thought about how to scaffold input, turn to output —-how students will demonstrate understanding. This includes assessments, writing, and projects. Begin by:

  • Accommodating instructions.
  • Modeling expectations.
  • Using an adjusted grading rubric based on language level.

Accommodation does not have to be difficult

Creating Language Targets

My favorite way to create language targets is by using  AI  tools such as MagicSchool or Chat GPT. The key is crafting a simple prompt. Here’s an example:  

“Create a language target from this learning target [insert target] for a WIDA Level 2 English language learner. Include sentence frames.”

You may need to revise the AI output to best suit your needs—-but it’s a great place to start..

Accommodate Input: Lessons

Pre-teach vocabulary: 

Use your language and learning targets to create a list of 8-12 vocabulary words per unit. Avoid trying to teach too many at once. Use a pretest to narrow your list.

  • Create a word wall (physical or digital)
  • Create a glossary with native-language translations and student-friendly definitions
  • Refer to the word wall throughout lessons
  • Encourage students to use the word wall or glossary during class and assessments.

Add visuals:

Use pictures, charts, icons, or illustrations to emphasize meaning. AI tools can generate custom images.

Reduce cognitive load:

  • Give students a copy of your notes/slides (paper, digital, or both)
  • Encourage two language note-taking using resources like Read&Write or bilingual dictionaries
  • For higher level students, create fill-in the blank guided notes

Accommodate Input: Texts

Using grade-level texts is essential to ensure equitable access to rigorous content. When scaffolded appropriately, these texts allow MLs to develop the skills necessary to long-term success. Do not limit students with simplified or below-level texts.

Translanguaging:

Translanguaging harnesses the power of all of the student’s  languages to make learning more meaningful.

  • Allow students to annotate and summarize text in their own language.
  • Pair students with their native-language peers to discuss key points before sharing in English.
  • Encourage native-language drafting or brainstorming. 
  • Provide a native-language copy of side-by-side with English text (use a two-column table for display)
  • Offer native-language summaries (AI tools can generate these)

Accommodate Output: Assessments, projects, and writing

Instructions:

  • For lower level students, translate instructions yourself—-don’t rely on students to do it
  • Paste translations onto worksheets, post them in Google Classroom, or project them on your board
  • Review instructions—in English—before modeling

Modeling:

  • Always model tasks or show examples
  • Think-aloud while modeling
  • Show completed examples of writing or projects

Rubrics:

  • Use student-friendly rubrics aligned to their proficiency level
  • Include native-language translations of the criteria along with English
  • Use single-point rubrics for clarity

Sentence Frames and Stems:

  • Provide word or phrase banks for sentence frames
  • Use AI to generate frames and stems based on your learning and language targets

Multiple-Choice Tests:

  • For written response items, provide sentence frames with a wordbank.
  • Remove one incorrect answer choice
  • Repeat familiar vocabulary, language patterns, and visuals
  • Open-note tests

Accommodation is not a smooth road

This list will jump-start your dive into supporting disciplinary literacy for MLs. The first time you try something, it might not work perfectly. You may still see students struggle, even after accommodation. That’s okay.

Struggle is expected. You are lightening their cognitive load—-you cannot remove it entirely. The goal is to bring the content closer, so they can reach out and touch it, not jump and miss it altogether.

Sometimes a scaffold works like a charm—fantastic! But often, you will need to adjust. 

Keep trying, keep tweaking, keep going. 

You, and your students, will get there. 

 Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
 Hakuta, K., Butler, Y. G., & Witt, D. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.


Carrie Rieder holds a Master’s in TESOL from Furman University and has over a decade of experience supporting multilingual learners. A certified Literacy Teacher and member of the Greenville County Impact Leadership cohort, she brings both academic and personal insight into language acquisition, shaped by raising bilingual children and living abroad. At Carolina High School, she teaches ESOL and sheltered English classes, working closely with colleagues to support the school’s high population of multilingual students.

Supporting Multilingual Language Learners in interdisciplinary literacy learning contexts

Blog

by Dr. Elke Schneider, Winthrop University

Who are multilingual language learners?

Multilingual language learners (MLLs) in middle and high school settings are as uniquely different as any plant and animal life, as the human race itself. Their personal life stories, their own or their families’ immigration stories from the past make them fascinatingly diverse members of a classroom when it comes to learning disciplinary content such as social studies, science, math and even English Language Arts. For instance, many are born here in the United States and have only known schooling in America (called second generation immigrants) while others have distinct socio-emotional imprints from their migration story (first or 1.5 generation immigrants) with either no or partial schooling experiences in the country they left. Students who have spent much time in refugee camps or an otherwise long migration experience with no or hardly any schooling (Students with Interrupted Formal Education or SIFE students) require significantly different attention than those born in the US without such experiences.

One might think only of the ‘deficits’ MLLs may have regarding the disciplinary curriculum content and/or language and cultural competencies. However, this narrow view fails to consider that MLLs can be great assets in an interdisciplinary learning community because of their varied life and home culture experiences. As educators, we can provide support mechanisms for language and content issues and integrate MLLs as valuable contributors to interdisciplinary learning in which everyone’s life story and experiences provide meaningful pillars for learning.

What constitutes interdisciplinary literacy?

Interdisciplinary literacy is based on the understanding that literacy, the ability to read, write, hold critical, academic dialog about disciplinary content with active listening and speaking skills, is a vital component of learning in every content area, may that be science, social studies, English language arts or mathematics. Digital literacy skills can also be added to interdisciplinary literacy since much of today’s learning in middle and secondary schools involves using digital devices and learning how to use digital resources in effective and ethically appropriate ways. These components are all embedded in South Carolina’s recent Career Ready Standards (2024) as well as in new 2024 Read to Succeed Standards. Each content area discipline has discipline-specific questions that are asked and pursued along with unique vocabulary and sentence structures that are used in discipline specific readings and writing. These discipline-specific features are new for all students, not just MLLs, but MLLs in various language acquisition stages will require specific support to become comfortable in using these unique disciplinary literacy skills.

What is the challenge for multilingual language learners with interdisciplinary literacy?

Based on their life story and background knowledge on content, MLLs require different kinds of support. Most commonly, it is the content language support that is in focus. However, language acquisition and acculturation to the school system and way of life go hand in hand. The more safe and accepted MLLs feel in the learning community of the school and the classroom, the faster their language skills improve (Ariza & Coady, 2018). Their background knowledge on academic content is also a key factor in determining what kind of language and social-emotional support MLLs need to succeed in interdisciplinary learning.

How can we support MLLs in succeeding in interdisciplinary literacy?

While collaboration with the multilingual teacher is paramount when paying individual attention to MLLs’ socio-emotional and academic needs, the general education teacher plays a crucial role in helping MLLs succeed in the interdisciplinary learning settings common in middle and high schools. The ways MLLs can be supported include a) helping MLLs comprehend and use the codes of disciplinary literacy, including both language features and disciplinary procedures, b) utilizing and honoring MLLs’ home language and cultural /content knowledge, c) providing an interactive, collaborative, and trusting learning environment in which peers and teachers interact closely and teachers foster questions and dialog.  Here are some selected ideas how to ensure MLLs feel actively integrated in interdisciplinary learning.

Suggestions for content literacy instruction

Utilizing and honoring MLLs’ home language and cultural /content knowledge

  • Take time to develop a personal bond with your MLLs by spending lunch time in small groups with them or individually to build the trust based necessary for MLLs’ healthy risk taking in the challenging tasks of disciplinary literacy. In this process, find out about MLL’s home situations and cultural and academic background and interests so you can utilize that when helping students make personal connection to disciplinary literacy tasks.
  • Prior to any disciplinary literacy task and content introduction, activate MLLs’ prior knowledge by eliciting experiences from their home culturewhere appropriate (i.e., wild life, weather, socio-cultural routines, historic sites, life/historic events, or how basic math skills were taught in the home culture). Focus on making real life connections of the disciplinary literacy content/skill explicit. This provides MLLs with motivation to explore disciplinary language and content because they feel valued and see a real life connection.

Providing an interactive, collaborative, and trusting learning environment

  • When possible, build in station work in which students work collaboratively in teams, native speakers and MLLs mixed together so they naturally engage in problem-solving team work and language use prior to individual work or assessment tasks. For a different collaborative learning set up, pair MLLs up with a trusting peer (native speaker or MLL) to talk through the steps of a tasks before requiring written notes. (i.e. math task, comprehension questions, science report content)
  • Include project-based learningin which MLLs can engage hands-on without being at a linguistic disadvantage. Using foldables in which student can paste drawings to images with supporting phrases or given sentence frames allows MLLs to demonstrate gained knowledge. This can meaningfully replace a standard written exam. (for resources see Dinah Zike’s website: https://dinah.com)
  • Schedule regular personal or small group meetings to check on and provide individualized learning support and feedback on learning progress. This is much more easily done when the classroom is set up for station and group work so that individual or small group conferencing can naturally be integrated. This allows for personal teacher-student connections in which MLLs can ask questions that they otherwise might not dare ask in front of the whole group.

Helping MLLs comprehend and use the codes of disciplinary literacy

  • Explicitly teach content specific vocabulary in connection with common phrases and sentence frames typical for the discipline so that MLLs can get used to using these structures with the vocabulary.  In this practice, provide at least 10-20 opportunities for MLLs (and other students who struggle with academic language tasks) to orally use the content vocabulary and break multisyllabic words down first demonstrating how to say these words syllable by syllable and then blending them together into the whole word at natural pace after having gone slowly on each syllable. For instance, for the word ‘photosynthesis’, the teacher has students repeat several times “photo”, then “syn”. Then students are shown to blend “photosyn” together several times. Then “the” (with unvoiced TH and long E)”, then “sis”, then “thesis” and then all syllables together as a whole word pronounced as ‘photosynthesis” several times in whispering, loud, happy, grouchy, or stern tones of voices to make the repetition more fun. Then students practice using the word in given sentence frames with common verbs and structures used to discuss and write about photosynthesis.
  • For MLLs, vocabulary instruction includes Tier 1, 2, and Tier 3 vocabulary. Therefore, word and language structures at Tier 1 (basic common life vocabulary) and Tier 2 (words that can be used in common life and disciplinary-specific contexts)
  • Support learning resources with visuals such as graphic organizers, handouts, PowerPoint Presentations and posters (illustrations graphs, pictures) so MLLs can derive meaning from them. If content specific graphs or charts are used, do not assume that MLLs know how to interpret and use them. Instead, demonstrate explicitly how to gain information from them. This is an essential component of building visual literacy in the content areas.
  • Encourage and provide space on graphic organizers or other platforms, for MLLs to use in their home language to engage in interdisciplinary literacy learning. This assists in utilizing translanguaging and the use of the whole learner with their home and new culture knowledge. It also fosters a sense of being respected as a multilingual learner.
  • Visually display sentence frames typical for a given task. For instance, sentence frames needed to complete certain math task in all its steps or sentence frames to use to make statements about a science experiment, or sentence frames to talk or write about a comparison of historic facts or two poems. MLs can use such structures in oral reflection about content or a task they have completed. Since even standardized math exams require students to write down their reasoning for steps taken, practicing orally before asking students to write down their thoughts is crucial (for more on academic oral language practicing in content areas, see Zwiers reference below). These sentence frames can vary in complexity so that various language competencies can be addressed in a scaffolded way. The following table (Table 1) provides a selective collection of sentence structures commonly used in interdisciplinary literacy settings:

Table 1: Examples of Sentence Frames for oral and written tasks

Literacy contextFor oral dialogFor writing
Compare-contrast information…. is/look/feels like. But …. Is/feels/looks like….…. Is/has/can…. On the contrary/in contrast, …..When I look at…., on the one hand I notice…., on the other hand I see….   I hear you but I see x differently/ I have another perspective to offer. While you…., I think…. because….   I would like to add a contrasting point of view/argument….When comparing…., it is obvious that….. is/has/shows…… while….. is/shows/has….   In contrast to…., x can….. As opposed to …, X can … because…..While……., x can/does….Contrary to…., ……    
Cause and effect informationIn my observation of/experience with…, I see the cause for….. in……I think based on what I read in…/we saw in the video clip, …. happened because….I conclude/infer that … because/because of …..Because….., …. happened.Because I forgot to…., I miscalculated….One reason for…..seems to be…. since/because…..As a result of…., …..              X was/is caused by….. Due to……, ……… Consequently, Based on information by (author) on page,… …. resulted in….  
  • Use gap filling exercises or assessments only with word banks. This allows MLLs to find the correct word which they can only do if they can receptively recognize the correct word. You can place more than the needed words in the word bank to increase the challenge. Without word banks, MLLs in initial and medial language acquisition stages are put at unjust disadvantages.
  • Allow for digital translation devices to assist when needed and let students write their translanguage findings down in a digital or handwritten resource file/folder. Allow students to use this as a reference whenever needed. Discuss this approach with grade level teams so MLLs can use their resources across disciplines.
  • Provide opportunities forchoral or paired readingto increases MLLs’ linguistic confidence in interdisciplinary reading, writing oral tasks. In choral reading, teachers read sentence by sentence with appropriate intonation, pausing, phrasing and pronunciation in natural pace and ask students to repeat these modeled sentences aloud as a class chorally. Students follow along on their own printed text copy. Teachers select such sentences/passages for choral reading based on important information and vocabulary.
  • A variation is choral responses of essential content in phrases and sentences. The teacher mindfully makes an important statement and then has students chorally repeat that essential content once or twice by saying the information/sentence again but then letting students complete the sentence with the missing information.
  • In order to build basic content vocabulary and routine language for novice MLLs with next to no understanding of English, label classroom items, provide images/photos with supporting language underneath for content specific routines (i.e. science lab procedures, mathematical procedure). Do also for content specific items such as science, math, social studies, technology tools (i.e., cursor on screen, magnifying glass, microscope, ruler, compass, scale, historic timelines, poetry features)

Selected resources:

  • Ariza, E. N. & Coady, M. R. (2018). Why TESOL? Theories and issues in teaching English to speakers of other languages in K-12 classrooms. (5th edition). Kendall Hunt.
  • Blair, L., Oliveira de, L. C., & Avalos, M. A. (2024). Expanding teacher understanding of scaffolding for multilingual learners using a language-based approach to content instruction. TESOL in Context, 33(1), 25-42.
  • Harrell, A. & Jordan, M. (2019). 50 strategies for teaching English language learners (6th edition). Pearson.
  • Zwiers, J. (2019). Next steps with Academic conversations. New ideas for improving learning through classroom talk. Routledge.

 Macintosh HD:WINTHROP:FALL 2022_classes & tasks:IDA proposals for F22:BIO PIC Elke.png For over 20 years, Dr. Elke Schneider has been a professor of literacy, special education, and multilingual learner education at Winthrop University, Rock Hill, South Carolina.

Performing Poetry: How Music Shapes Poetic Analysis

Uncategorized, Webinar

Missed the live webinar? You can now access the recording of “Performing Poetry: How Music Shapes Poetic Analysis”! Held on April 24, 2025, this insightful session led by Catheryn Cofield explored the powerful connection between musical literacy and deeper poetic analysis for grades 6-12 educators. Discover practical strategies to illuminate complex elements of spoken word and poetry, such as cadence and structure, using the universal language of music. Learn how to reinforce key reading skills and enhance student engagement, as presented by music educator Catheryn Cofield. Click the link below to watch the recording and unlock new ways to connect your students with poetry!

About the Author

Ms. Colfield is a first-year teacher serving at Chester Middle School in Chester, SC. She graduated from Anderson University in 2024 with her bachelor’s in Vocal Music education and is currently serving as both a general music teacher and choir director at her school. She believes musical literacy is a key component of any competent music program and one of the greatest tools that a developing reader can have.

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

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

Do We Need to Take This Outside?

Teaching

Kristie Camp continues to answer this question as she expands on the benefits of outdoor learning an environmental literacy. Read more about Kristie at the end of her blog.


Amanda (names changed) was not happy that we had brought the turtle back into our classroom, despite most of the class being excited about the prospect of having a class pet. She wrote in her journal that day, “I felt that we should have put him back, because didn’t we talk about how humans are messing up the environment this week while reading the whale shark chapter in World of Wonders? I really do hope we don’t mess this turtle caring business up.” Our weekly walks in the woods and the book we were reading together must have made a lasting impact on how Amanda viewed her role as an environmental steward. The rest of the class conceded she was right, and within a few days, we all participated in a rehoming ceremony for our turtle.

Studies have shown that positive experiences in nature develop long-lasting affective associations with the natural world, which often times translate into activism and advocacy for environmental causes (Křepelková, et al., 2020; Soga & Gaston, 2024). As a veteran teacher of 26 years in high school English language arts (ELA), I have found that outdoor learning not only serves as a powerful conduit to creative thinking and cooperative action, but it also lays a solid foundation for environmental literacy, as Amanda and her classmates demonstrated with returning the turtle to his home.

When I use the term environmental literacy, I refer to an individual’s ability and willingness to make ethical and research-based decisions about their environmental choices, as well as their desire to conserve natural resources (California, 2015; MAEOE, 2024; NAAEE, 2024). Environmental literacy does not manifest itself only at the individual level; it is also a cooperative and collective move toward learning how to participate in civic life for the good of all living creatures (California, 2015; MAEOE, 2024; NAAEE, 2024). Teachers who provide opportunities for cooperative learning outdoors foster those affective connections that just might grow into cooperative action toward sustainability that benefits us all.

As children grow older, their time outside seems to diminish. Students today have spent less time playing outside than previous generations (Schilhab, et al., 2018; Selhub & Logan, 2012; Williams & Wainwright, 2016; Zeng, et al, 2021). The less time students spend outdoors corresponds with an increase of time spent behind screens (Barrette, 2022; Jackson, et al., 2020). The increased time behind screens instead of outside has implications for teens’ academic progress and their overall wellbeing (Hicks, et al., 2021; Kuo, et al., 2018). Increased screen time paired with fewer opportunities for spending time outside and with others has contributed to rising mental health challenges and physical ailments for teens (Abenes, 2022; Barrette, et al., 2022; Hedderson, 2023) as well as a reduced ability to concentrate and more difficulty communicating with peers socially (Abenes, 2022; Nadeem & Van Meter, 2023). In addition, digital immersion has often lured students into relying too heavily on artificial intelligence to the detriment of their own originality and creativity (Daniel, et al, 2023; Zhao & Watterson, 2021).

Engaging with the physical environment and interacting with nature through multiple senses offer ways to mitigate some of the detrimental effects of too much screen time, and outdoor learning can benefit teens’ health and academic progress. Outdoor spaces are conducive for sensory experiences and creative activities that incorporate artifacts within the setting (Asfeldt, et al., 2020; Beames, et al., 2012; Quay & Seaman, 0216; Selhub & Logan, 2012). Lessons that reconnect students with the physical world and its artifacts offer sensory experiences that employ both cognitive and kinesthetic processing, thereby providing a more memorable and meaningful learning experience. If the context of the classroom expands so that students interact in a tactile way with the physical world that surrounds them, then their attention turns outward, opening the way for creative and imaginative expression simply because they have new physical experiences from which to think and create (Beames et al., 2012; Carpenter & Harper, 2016; Quay & Seaman, 2016). It also opens the way for environmental stewardship as students first learn to love their local landscapes, and that love often spurs protection advocacy for broader ones.

During our outdoor adventures, Amanda reminded us that we needed to leave Gerald the turtle in his natural habitat, but Jake taught us about his early childhood in the Philippines and told us stories about how he and his cousins would put spiders on a stick to see if they would fight.

Several of us responded in disbelief: “You didn’t really pick up spiders and put them on a stick, did you?”.

“Yes, we did. Let me show you,” Jake replied.

Within a few minutes he had a spider on a stick and had us looking for a companion to place beside it. About three of us leaned in, not blinking, as Seth placed a smaller spider within inches of the larger one. We didn’t even have time to pull out our phones to start filming before the larger spider whipped out its web and wrapped the smaller one into its death blanket.

After our exhalations of astonishment and awe, we began to toss questions at Jake about his childhood. “We didn’t know you were born in the Philippines! When did you come to the US? Do you speak another language?” Jake kindly told us about his family in the Philippines and his move to the United States in elementary school. In his journal that day, he wrote about how that day’s experiences brought back memories he hadn’t realized he had forgotten. The rest of us walked away with a little more thorough understanding of each other. We were able to relate to the natural world in ways unique to our cultural experiences, which created a more democratic and cooperative learning environment for us all.

Before I share more examples from our outdoor classroom, I must acknowledge the privilege that I enjoy. Our school has numerous places for outdoor lessons — courtyards, access to the track and practice fields, and a wooded area across the street from the school where the cross-country team runs — and my current and previous principals have encouraged my use of our green spaces. I understand that not all teachers have access to safe outdoor spaces and supportive administration, but just about any outdoor space can be made into an engaging classroom, and I hope researching the benefits of green spaces in schools will fuel the movement to provide outdoor learning space for all students.

Here are some ways I have found to take class outside for numerous benefits, including participating in memorable content lessons, building classroom community, and cultivating environmental literacy. Of course, the examples come from an ELA class, but the process is easily adaptable to just about any discipline. 

String Journals

I learned about string journals when I spent a week studying Thoreau at the Walden Woods Project in their summer program, Approaching Walden, in 2019. I took what I learned and adapted it for my class in the fall of 2020. I printed and laminated a name tag for each student and attached a waterproof twine.

Students found a place in the woods where they wanted to return throughout the semester, and they hung their tags there. Each time we went to the woods for an outdoor lesson, we began with a moment of observation and writing at our string journal spots. By the end of the semester, students had a time-lapsed set of descriptive writing that detailed changes in the spot from August to December. This lesson works for writing instruction as easily as it will for scientific notetaking or geological study. Students can practice sketching and documenting the environment as a professional naturalist, archeologist, or geographer might.

Photo Essays

            Students can create a photo essay (such as in the model of Humans from New York, for example) from images taken while outside around campus. Students learn to select images carefully for symbolic purposes while making the most of limited written text space. The content of photo essays is dependent on the content being taught (for example, artistic expression or documentation of natural change over time) and therefore adaptable for any discipline. Social studies classes might focus on natural resources or local history, whereas world language classes might center vocabulary acquisition.

Art Collections, Collages, and Memory Jars

            While outside, our class has collected interesting artifacts from the woods including a mysterious jawbone, persimmons, and unique leaves and wildflowers. Students have also brought back live creatures – caterpillars, unknown white creepers, and our pet turtle – even though we cannot keep those as part of a collection. The collections represent students’ adventures outdoors, and a story almost always accompanies the item selected, which forms the basis for original writing, full of sensory imagery and emotive language that I don’t often see in their traditional classroom assignments. We have also made art collages from artifacts gathered outside and students articulated reasons for the items they chose to include, again extending their understanding of symbolism and metaphor.

            Yet, a biology class might create a leaf collection to be labeled and categorized. A geology class might collect rocks and minerals for a similar display. A math class might collect examples of different shapes or different representations of the same angle or slope.

Using Aimee Nezhukumatathil’s (2020) example in her chapter, “Firefly Photinus Pyralis” in her nature memoir World of Wonders, In Praise of Fireflies, Whale Sharks, and Other Astonishments, we collected items from the woods to store in memory jars for our class as a way to commemorate our outdoor adventures together. What physical representations do we want to keep as memories of our shared experiences outside? These collections can also provide materials for a multimodal art display in an art class or indicators of geographical descriptors for one’s local environment (for example, what do we find in the woods that demonstrate we live in a foothills region?) in geography class.

Blood Pressure Checks

            After reading an article about forest bathing and how spending time outside reduces people’s blood pressure, we decided to put the article to the test. Our school nurse graciously helped us by taking each student’s blood pressure before we went outside and again when we came in after our walk outside. We recorded the data anonymously and analyzed it; while our findings didn’t necessarily align with those in the article, the process of analyzing the data gave us a chance to critically analyze the article and consider reasons our results might not have aligned with those in the formal study. This activity fits just as well in a math, health, or science class as it does in an ELA class.

Nature Poetry

            Studying mentor texts from professional nature writers provides us with a model for poetic language and symbolic representation. I include picture books as mentor texts, as well, and then encourage students to create and illustrate as they are inspired to do. Modern nature poets such as J. Drew Lanham, Ada Limón, and Aimee Nezhukumatathil provide accessible and representative poetry that inspires students to see beyond their cursory look at their school environment. Yet, students might also model scientific writing from professional naturalists and even film moments in nature following models of nature documentaries. The point is to create as professionals in the field create — whether that professional is a poet, an ornithologist, filmmaker, or a historian.

            There are so many more opportunities for taking high schoolers outside for interactive learning, and the resource list I have provided here will spur many more new ideas. Regardless of the lesson, the magic of the outdoor classroom lies in students’ physical interaction with the natural environment coinciding with the shared experiences among classmates. Too often our classes seem almost virtual despite the number of bodies all sitting in a room together. Standardized curricula and mandated benchmarks tie us to screens, and the classroom itself comes with traditional expectations of what academic writing looks like and what acceptable school performance is defined as. By the time they reach their junior year in high school, many students have compartmentalized school behaviors and school literacies as quite different from their authentic lives and literacies. Too often this compartmentalizing results in stilted, perfunctory work within the classroom.

            The outdoor classroom does not hold those same expectations, and without these expectations, students are free to pursue joint adventures and open themselves up to conversations and experiences. These small lessons that still fulfill requirements of curriculum standards have the potential to provide positive experiences with nature that form the affective connections later leading to activism and advocacy.

Taking students outside brings interaction with the material world, such as trees, animals, and plants, and this material engagement prepares students for self-reflective questions, such as

  • How are humans connected to the natural world?
  • What is my personal relationship to the natural world?
  • Do others see the natural world the same way I do? Why or why not? 
  • What are my obligations to the natural world? 

Strong memories developed through physical interaction with nature and shared experiences among classmates can be the starting point for meaningful place-based learning and environmental literacy, as Amanda taught us all when she urged us to leave our turtle in his natural habitat.


Ms. Camp is a PhD candidate in Language and Literacy at the University of South Carolina (USC). A National Board Certified Instructor, she has taught English Language Arts at Gaffney High School in
Gaffney, SC, for 26 years. She has served as an AP English Assesser, a National Writing Project teacher consultant, and an adjunct instructor with Spartanburg Community College, Limestone University, and USC. She shared her experiences with outdoor learning in an article published in English Journal in 2023, and she was awarded a Teacher Researcher Grant from National Council of Teachers of English in 2024 to help fund her dissertation study that investigates the influence of an outdoor setting on high school students’ writing practices.

Rubrics to Support Writers

Teaching

Dr. Christina Dobbs follows up her webinar with this blog to challenge instructors to create rubrics that grow writing literacy and result in positive student-teacher interaction. Read more about her at the end of the blog.


During the COVID-19 pandemic, I had planned a study of writing instruction at the university level that involved interviews with students and visits to introductory writing classes that would help understand how undergraduates had made the transition from high school to university writing.  But fate intervened and doing work to observe in class instructional spaces became complicated as we began to teach and work from home, and so I made a decision to just keep interviewing undergraduates about their experiences.  Eighty interviews later, I am so glad to have had the opportunity to talk deeply with a wide range of students about their experience of writing in school across their lives and whether and how they see themselves as writers. 

This work, alongside some other work with my colleague Chris Leider from UMass Boston, has caused me to spend time thinking deeply about the feedback we explicitly and implicitly give to students about their writing.  As a teacher, I always struggled to give feedback on writing in a timely way that still felt deeply engaged with the work, and students didn’t always use the feedback I gave them to improve their writing, which never felt good.  This new work about more effective and culturally sustaining feedback for students has helped me to understand what might have worked better in my own classroom and even in my own experience as a writer myself.

Across the work Chris and I have done with teachers over time and what I learned about feedback from my interviews with undergraduates, I have come to a new approach to feedback.  Here are two lessons learned across those projects.

Lesson #1:  Even if we didn’t know it, students remember our feedback, especially when they feel it was negative.

In talking with undergraduates about the feedback they received on their writing and times they felt proud of their writing, I was shocked by how much they remembered about feedback they had been given.  Students relayed memories from elementary, middle, and high school as well as college, and sometimes they still felt strong emotions associated with those memories.

They described memories when a teacher had made them feel as though their ideas were worth engaging and that they had written something thought-provoking.  They also described the positive experience of answering questions about their writing when feedback was given or feeling like their work inspired curiosity from the reader. 

They also relayed moments when they got feedback that made them feel like their teachers had not really engaged with their ideas.  This included times when they only got feedback on surface conventions or grammar, but it also included times when they just got a ‘good job’ or ‘great work’ too.  Somehow this insubstantial positive feedback also made students feel as though they had not written ideas worth engaging.

Most importantly, the writers often described wanting to improve their work, but feeling as though some feedback they received was not helping them to do so.  Some even described the feedback as showing them they actually would not be able to improve.  They described teachers who made them feel as though they were already supposed to know everything before they took the class and those who clearly conveyed that they could improve.

This has led to a few ideas about giving feedback that I carry forward:

  • Asking questions about the content seems to matter to many writers.
  • Encouraging writers through feedback at various levels of the work, from the overall idea to the conventions, can support students in viewing their work as substantial.
  • Telling students that they can improve, and we will help them to do so explicitly can convey our belief in students’ potential for growth.

Lesson #2:  It doesn’t matter what you say to students if your rubric says something else.

The rubrics we use to evaluate student writing often use harsh and deficit-driven language to separate students in particular categories.  Rubrics will have category labels such as ‘unsatisfactory,’ ‘below expectations,’ or ‘warning’ to delineate performance, with upper category labels with headings like ‘outstanding’ or ‘excellent.’ 

Then within categories, the statements to describe various levels of performance will have language such as:

  • Writer has little or no control over sentence structure.
  • Reasoning is incoherent or unclear.
  • The use of language fails to demonstrate skill in responding to the task. (This example is from the ACT rubric.)

The designers of rubrics such as these likely did not think they were harshly commenting on students as writers; in fact, they likely thought they were only commenting on the piece of writing at hand and how well it communicates.

But the personal nature of writing and the ways that writers use feedback and comparison to others to drive their own writing self-efficacy (Pajares, 2003; Pajares & Johnson, 1996) makes it clear that writers likely internalize some of this commentary as about themselves, even if the teacher giving feedback did not mean it as such.  Indeed, in my interviews with undergraduate students, they frequently described memorable feedback and harsh rubrics from many years earlier (going back to elementary) as drivers of whether they perceived themselves as writers in college years later. 

Chris and I developed a question framework to help guide teachers in redesigning rubrics in ways that still convey critical feedback to students in ways that feel encouraging and supportive.  We use these four questions to help teams of teachers we work with to revise rubrics to convey feedback in more supportive and equity-driven ways.  The four questions (from Dobbs & Leider, 2021) are as follows:

  • Does the rubric’s scale of values for judging responses suggest that students have room to grow?
  • Do the tools emphasize development and purpose when it comes to language use?
  • Does the rubric feedback connect student language to audience?
  • Does the tool explicitly acknowledge that students have agency in choosing which of their language resources to use?

We use these questions not to shift the feedback away from various elements of the writing that we want to give feedback about, but rather to push us to phrase our thinking in a way that treats writers in humane and supportive ways.

So, we use these framing questions to rephrase headings and sentences on rubrics.  What might have said ‘unsatisfactory’ before might say ‘still learning,’ ‘room to grow,’ or even ‘focus for next time.’  Where we might have said that ‘reasoning was incoherent,’ we might shift to say that ‘the writer’s reasons supporting their argument were challenging for the reader to understand.’ 

These sorts of changes convey to students that they can still be working on various elements of their writing, which all students are doing and is the purpose of schooling.  They can also convey that writing feedback is not a matter of knowing how to do it ‘right’ or ‘wrong,’ but it is rather a matter of whether your communicative purpose was understood by the audience.  It also conveys that students made choices about the writing they chose to put forward and that they can continue to improve that writing’s purpose, not just it’s perceived correctness on things like punctuation.

Over time, I’ve learned that giving feedback is meaningful to students in ways I had not always realized, and that making purposeful and specific choices in how to give feedback can make a huge difference in how students are able to take up the feedback we give them.  That way, years down the road when they are in college and being interviewed, they will relay memories of feeling supported and confident as writers.

References

Dobbs, C. L. & Leider, C. M. (2021). A framework for writing rubrics to support linguistically diverse students. English Journal, 110(5), 60-68.

Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 138-158.

Pajares, F. & Johnson, M. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in the writing of high school students: A path analysis. Psychology in the Schools, 33(2), 163-175.


Dr. Christina L. Dobbs is an Assistant Professor in English Education. Her research interests include academic language development, the argumentative writing of students, and professional development for secondary content teachers. She is a former high school teacher in Houston, Texas, as well as a literacy coach and reading specialist.