Writing

Equitable Disciplinary Literacy Instruction For Students in Poverty

Blog, Uncategorized

This blog is written by Doris Walker-Dalhouse and Victoria Risko to advocate for strong literacy instruction that benefits all students, with a particular emphasis on literacy instruction for students living in poverty. When we think of strong literacy support for some of our most vulnerable students, we are keenly aware that initiatives to provide educators with professional development to support children living in poverty are being cancelled at the federal level even though progress with such programs indicate progress.  

Stay tuned — registration information for their upcoming webinar will be coming soon, and we can’t wait to continue the conversation with you!

Literacy Instruction for our Most Vulnerable Students  

            According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 1 in 7 school-age children lives in poverty, which has a major impact on their education. Approximately 16% of U.S. children (11.4 million) lived in poverty in 2022-2023, with a 13.4% poverty rate for school-age children (5-17). In 2026, there are indicators that the number of students living in poverty may be even greater with high, persistent child poverty rates paired with proposed or enacted federal funding cuts that threaten to reduce services for low-income students. 

National and local statistics indicate that overall children living in poverty continue to perform poorly on class assignments and mandated tests and they often have low participation in class literacy activities. These children most frequently live in inner city and rural areas or they may be children living in homeless shelters.  It is likely that these students are racially, linguistically, and culturally diverse (Najarro, 2022).  And while poverty cannot be traced to singular causes (e.g., racism, low paying jobs, insufficient health coverage), we are keenly aware that income equality within the last decade — world-wide — has widened the gap between those families that are challenged for food and housing security and those that are benefitting from increased wealth (Desmond, 2023).

            There is no doubt that educators who teach in high poverty areas face multiple challenges and these challenges include underfunded public schools where teacher tenure and retention are lowest, teacher turnover is high, and resources are limited. There is a long history associated with underfunded schools and resources in both rural and urban high poverty areas. As Gorski (2018) and others argue, “privilege begets privilege”. Students privileged to attend well-resourced schools with stability of educators in place long term are on a trajectory to receive continuous supports that are needed for all students, but frequently not available or sustained in high poverty schools. 

Instructional Inequities

            A “sameness” of instruction for all students conflates equality (e.g., belief that fairness requires same for all) with equity when diverse histories and experiences require differentiation. (Wells, 2011). Not only is instruction not differentiated for students’ capabilities and needs, but frequently there is a lack of culturally relevant materials (Smagorinsky, Lakly, & Johnson, 2002), most notably the use of texts and materials in which students do not see themselves or their communities (Ascenzi-Moreno & Quifiones, 2020). A “Null Curriculum” (Milner, 2017) developed in some states, with punitive actions against schools that address racism, racial histories, and cultural differences, denies explicit attention to students’ histories and identities.  Milner (2018c) argues that students are not given a “fighting chance to maximize their capacity and humanity”. Additionally, intervention programs, such as Response to Intervention (RTI) that is widely implemented, have inadequate investigations of their effectiveness and response to inequities (Artiles, 2015).

Weak and Failed National Policies

            There is a long history of disappointing outcomes of federal funding intended to support the learning of students living in poverty. A “deeply flawed policy legacy of overemphasizing standardized-test scores” (Najarro, 2022, p. 3) is the product of the dominant, White middle-class culture in the United States. Over-reliance on standardized tests fail to provide information about students’ interests, their feelings of belonging, how well the instruction represents students’ cultural backgrounds, and what additional resources and opportunities may be needed (Najarro, 2022).

Among weak or failed programs are the following. The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) (2001), with the associated Even Start Family Literacy Program, overall failed to improve K-3 literacy instruction for students living in poverty (St. Pierre, Ricciuti, & Rimdzius, 2005). Similarly, funding efforts (e.g., Gates Foundation, and Title 1) for high poverty schools have had virtually no impact (Noguera & Wells, 2011). The hard work required by national laws to address inequities—giving all students a level playing field with additional resources and opportunities as needed– has been “crumbling” (Najarro, 2022) for at least the last decade.

Addressing Inequities

            Addressing inequities, especially as they relate to impoverished students and communities, is a world-wide issue and is met with different responses. One approach has been to provide equal input for all students, such as providing equal funds for schools or the same curriculum for all. Described as taking an equality approach, the emphasis is placed on giving all students the same opportunities to succeed. In contrast, an equity approach, is grounded in the concepts of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) to differentiate instruction, provide additional resources and opportunities when needed, and build on students’ culture and traditions while expanding their knowledge and experiences.

            Starting in 2016, there was an expansion of an equity focus—multiple districts in the United States, for example, reported heightened interest and proposed actions at the district level to address DEI (Najarro, 2022). Unfortunately, the word “equity” became a trigger for pushback as early as 2018 (Sawchuk, 2022). This pushback, both legislative and public, represented fears of losing “strong programs” for those who were already succeeding in schools.

Initiatives to provide educators with professional development in the areas of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are being stopped in their infancy (Illeana Najarro, Education Week, September 6, 2022) even though progress is reported.  Added to the push to eliminate DEI initiatives are book bans that began to appear in March 2023 and were put in place in 86 school districts across the U. S. Specifically, these bans focus on books with LGBTQ characters, characters of color, and books that address inequities associated with diversity, race, and racism. Najarro (2022) argues that these initiatives represent legislators’ and special interest groups’ retaliation against apparent progress in meeting DEI goals. 

This issue of providing curricula that is relevant – relevant to students’ culture, their histories, their interests, and their instructional needs – is crucial for teachers to address if we expect to stem “learning poverty”. Amid movements to abandon or lessen the impact of changes erasing diversity represented among our students, educators can either be overwhelmed or take these actions as an “urgent message to forge ahead”.

Goal for Instruction: Addressing Disciplinary Literacy and Teaching What is Relevant to Students’ Culture, Histories, Interests, and Instructional Needs

            To meet this goal, we describe three instructional actions (a) that sustain students’ cultural histories, (b) while advancing their knowledge and literacy development, and (c) addressing their questions and needs.  Each of these actions are developed more fully in our text, Equitable Literacy Instruction for Students in Poverty (Walker-Dalhouse & Risko, 2024).

1.Culturally Sustaining Disciplinary Literacy (Rachelle S. Savitz & Janelle Williams, 2024). In their 2024 example and through multiple other publications, Savitz and Williams describe methods for enhancing both disciplinary reading and writing, and positioning students as knowledgeable and active participants in their learning. Aligning with national and state standards, units of instruction focus on content that is both relevant to students’ prior knowledge and interests and that advances academic learning.  For example, instruction might focus on “monitoring and minimizing human impact on the environment”. 

            Taking a problem-solving approach, students engage in generating questions about “equitable access to clean water in their community and globally”.  The topic of clean water is particularly important in Michigan (where this instruction occurred) with its issue of problematic conditions related to water quality (e.g., Flint water crisis, infestation of zebra mussels, Nestle corporation’s use of water, etc.). Inquiry questions generated with students might include: How people are taking action on equitable access to clean water in my community and globally or How do we decide if information provided is trustworthy and credible on environmental issues such as clean water (Savitz and Janelle Williams in Walker-Dalhouse & Risko, 2024, pg. 33).  

            Texts are purposely selected to demonstrate a wide range of perspectives and evidence related to claims about clean water. Students examine scientific texts, analyzing claims and evidence provided, and consider what can be learned from a range of perspectives and challenges that scientists face. Disciplinary writing (that meets writing standards) engages students in taking up authentic perspective and problem-solving methods that address potential water hazards. Letters of advocacy with proposed methods of change or problem-solving methods are written to community agencies and community leaders. Class discussions expand students’ knowledge and abilities to express their understandings of the issue and potential problem-solving methods. Throughout these applications connections are made to students’ lives, their neighborhoods, and their decisions illustrating how science and technical advances related to clean water are connected to their lives.

2. Disciplinary Learning through Multimodal Story Telling (Blaine E. Smith, 2024). Blaine Smith demonstrates how story telling with digital multimodal composing supports science learning for middle school students. With Smith’s guidance, students generated ideas to integrate visuals, sounds, and text when composing a science narrative. Prior to composing their own texts, students read multiple texts, including web-based science texts, gaining scientific knowledge about selected topics and issues – issues that were relevant to the students and their communities. For example, learning about climate change and its effect on local farmers engaged students in robust conversations about changes, theories related to these changes, and their impact.

             Students also examined published multimodal texts and then engaged in learning how to be intentional in their use of visuals, sounds, and annotations to convey important information. Students engaged with complex scientific issues while learning how to express their newly learned science knowledge in a variety of formats that were meaningful to them and their peers. Class discussions and added readings supported students’ knowledge development and perspective taking, enhancing their learning as they generated connections to issues that affected them and their communities.

3. Embedding Skills and Strategy Instruction within Authentic Contexts across the Grades for Multilingual Learners (Pacheco, McKee, and Lai, 2024). Pacheco, McKee, and Lai demonstrate how a text focusing on character education can engage multilingual students in thinking about the challenges they face as newcomers in a school and community and the actions they take to resolve their dilemmas. They describe how Ms. George (a sixth-grade teacher) whose students (from six different home countries) engages in text discussions. Asking students to reflect on difficult decisions in their everyday experiences and how their actions are similar to characters within the texts is a focus of their text discussions. And when holding these text discussions, students are encouraged to use their home languages as needed to represent their thinking.

            One example shared by Pacheco and his colleagues focused on the text, Little Things are Big Things (Colon, 1961). Ms George and her students analyzed the text using a graphic organizer to identify “what makes a good decision” and “what are good actions” when facing conflicts. Connections to students’ personal lives and decision making and how individuals historically have worked toward goodness (even when faced with racism as in the Colon (1961) text supported the students’ personal growth in overcoming difficult environments in which they live while advancing their disciplinary knowledge and text comprehension.

            Across the above examples of disciplinary instruction, these principles guide their implementation:

  • Teaching actions are intentional and provide access to knowledge building in ways that honor students as individuals.
  • Instruction is embedded in the view that school and curriculum provide access to equitable opportunities that support students’ comprehension as literacy and disciplinary learners.

Conclusion

            As educators, we must dignify our economically marginalized students by making visible their multiple interests, histories and capabilities. Instruction described in this blog offers three examples that demonstrate a commitment to honor students’ culture and traditions while expanding their disciplinary knowledge and experiences.

Doris Walker-Dalhouse, PhD, professor emerita at both Marquette University and Minnesota State University Moorhead, is a former 4th -6th grade teacher in high-poverty schools including  the Marva Collins Preparatory Program at Linlee School in Lexington, KY. She served for four years as the Director of the Sudanese community-based reading clinic for K-refugee students (Moorhead, MN) funded by the Otto Bremer Foundation and is a member of the Marquette University Autism Initiative. Her co-authored books include Be That Teacher! Breaking the cycle for struggling readers (Risko, 2012) and Equitable Literacy Instruction for Students in Poverty (Risko, 2024) and an edited book Culturally sustaining literacy pedagogies: Honoring students’ heritages, literacies, and language (Cantrell and Lazar, 2022). She is a past member of the Board of Directors of ALER, IRA, and LRA; past coeditor of the Research in the Classroom column (The Reading Teacher) and is President of the Reading Hall of Fame.

Victoria J. Risko, EdD, a professor emerita at Vanderbilt University, taught in the language, literacy and culture program within the Department of Teaching and Learning.  A former 1st and 4th grade teacher, Dr. Risko collaborated with educators across the grade levels and in high poverty and racially diverse schools. A past president of the International Literacy Association and the Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers, Dr. Risko has published in numerous journals and research handbooks. She is co-author of several books, including Be That Teacher!: Breaking the Cycle for Struggling Readers (with Walker-Dalhouse, 2012), Reading Assessment to Promote Equitable Learning (with Elish-Piper and Matthews, 2022), and Equitable Literacy Instruction for Students in Poverty (with Walker-Dalhouse, 2024).  A recipient of several national and international awards for contributions to research and literacy education, Dr Risko is a member of the Reading Hall of Fame.

Empowering Black Youth Through Competitive Business Learning

Blog

Throughout human history, competition has served as an essential catalyst for growth and development. It is widely recognized for enhancing cognitive functions, promoting reasoning and analytical skills, by engaging individuals in situations that challenge their adaptability and problem-solving abilities. Within the African-American community, traditional competitive experiences have often been rooted in athletic pursuits. While sports indeed offer significant cognitive benefits, such as fostering strategic and creative thinking, it is worthwhile considering additional avenues that may be equally or more effective in advancing cognitive development. One such approach, which I have utilized extensively to shape high school students, is the business case competition.

To provide context, business case competitions are collaborative, team-based events where students devise and present solutions to genuine business challenges before experienced professionals. Participants conduct thorough research and develop practical recommendations within a dynamic group environment. In relation to cognitive development, these competitions address three key areas:

  • Abstract Thinking: The capacity to generate ideas beyond conventional data and perspectives.
  • Metacognition: An awareness of one’s own thought processes achieved through reflection.
  • Problem Solving: The ability to navigate challenges by designing actionable solutions.

Abstract Thinking

Business case competitions confront students with multifaceted problems that demand abstract thought. Participants must interpret extensive information concerning a company, its industry, and external factors. This complexity encourages creative, out-of-the-box thinking and requires a broad perspective to craft innovative solutions. The business sector frequently relies on original concepts that transcend established modes of thought, motivating students to deliver such insight.

Metacognition

Cultivating the ability to reflect on one’s thinking processes is vital for navigating life’s intricacies. Recognizing and adapting personal cognitive strengths and weaknesses promotes resilience in the face of evolving circumstances. Case competitions require methodical analysis to formulate effective solutions. Students not only justify their approaches but also communicate them to seasoned professionals, receiving constructive critiques that refine their thinking and support ongoing intellectual growth.

Problem Solving

Participation in business case competitions markedly strengthens students’ problem-solving skills. Confronted with intricate, real-world business dilemmas, students are required to systematically analyze a wealth of information, discerning critical issues and underlying causes. This process involves evaluating multiple variables and perspectives to construct well-reasoned, actionable solutions. By engaging in this rigorous exercise, students develop a disciplined approach to addressing multifaceted problems, preparing them to navigate challenges both in academic settings and future professional environments.

Beyond cognitive development, this project allows students to demonstrate disciplinary understanding in ways that mirror the authentic practices of the business field. In tackling real organizational challenges, students must interpret data, assess market dynamics, evaluate operational constraints, and craft strategic recommendations — the same analytical processes used by professionals. Their learning becomes visible through the creation of deliverables that reflect industry standards, such as executive summaries, financial models, strategic frameworks, and persuasive presentations. By engaging directly with the tools, language, and decision-making structures of the discipline, students move beyond theoretical knowledge and instead enact business thinking in context. This authentic performance reveals a deep, applied understanding that traditional classroom tasks rarely capture.

Business case competitions serve as powerful platforms for fostering essential cognitive skills among students. By engaging in these challenging events, students enhance their abilities in abstract thinking, metacognition, and problem-solving skills that are crucial for academic achievement and future career success.  The dynamic and collaborative nature of these competitions not only sharpens students’ intellectual capacities but also prepares them to face complex, real-world challenges with confidence and creativity.  Empowerment that remains with students for life.  Is that not the point of education… 

Practical Approach for a Classroom (Small Scale):

This project allows students to show what they know by doing the actual work of the discipline. Instead of completing worksheets or answering isolated questions, students take on real business challenges that require them to analyze information, evaluate options, and develop solutions. They must think like business professionals—considering audience, feasibility, and impact—while using academic language and evidence to support their decisions.

Their understanding becomes visible through what they produce and present. Students create proposals, explain their reasoning, and defend their ideas in front of others, often receiving feedback like what professionals’ experience. This process pushes them to refine both their thinking and communication. As a result, students are not just learning about business concepts, they are actively applying them in authentic, meaningful ways.

For teachers looking to begin embedding a business logic mindset in their students, the following quick lesson provides an accessible starting point.

Objective

Students will analyze a real-world business scenario and develop a recommendation supported by evidence.

Learning Targets (Post for students)

  • I can identify a problem in a business scenario.
  • I can use evidence to support a practical solution.
  • I can explain my thinking using academic language.

Materials

  • Business scenario (teacher-created, local business, or article excerpt from sources such as Harvard Business Review)
  • Chart paper or Google Slides
  • Sentence frames (provided below)

1. Warm-Up (5–7 minutes) — Hook

Prompt:
 A local business is losing customers. What could be the problem? What should they do?

Students:

  • Think → Pair → Share

2. Mini-Lesson (10 minutes) — Model Thinking

Teacher introduces a short business case (ex: café losing customers).

Model aloud:

  • Identify the problem
  • Use evidence
  • Propose a solution

Model Sentence:

“The business is struggling because ___. One piece of evidence is ___. Therefore, they should ___.”

3. Guided Practice (15–20 minutes) — Team Challenge

Students work in small groups:

Task:

  • Identify the problem
  • Analyze 2–3 pieces of information
  • Create a solution

Provide Sentence Frames:

  • “The main problem is ___ because ___.”
  • “One piece of evidence is ___.”
  • “This suggests ___.”
  • “Our recommendation is ___ because ___.”

✔ Encourage:

  • Partner talk before writing
  • Shared responsibility in groups

4. Presentations (10–15 minutes) — Authentic Performance

Each group presents:

  • Problem
  • Evidence
  • Solution

Audience listens and responds:

  • “I agree with ___ because ___.”
  • “I would add ___.”

5. Quick Assessment / Exit Ticket (5 minutes)

Students respond individually:

“What was your group’s solution, and what evidence supports it?”

Elliot Neal serves as Director of the Leaders of Tomorrow Program for the National Black MBA Association Charlotte Chapter, bringing over four years of experience in leadership development and youth engagement. In this capacity, he directs a high school leadership development initiative designed to prepare students for academic, professional, and personal advancement. He also has multiple years of experience designing, developing, and leading teams of high school students for participation in national business case competitions. His work reflects a sustained commitment to mentorship and community impact, with a focus on cultivating students’ analytical skills, professional confidence, and long-term leadership capacity.

Social Justice as Discipline Reconstruction

Blog

Unit co-designed by Katelyn Zarr and Jessica McCullough

On a color-coded anchor chart are the ways historians read, write, and think: they interpret primary and secondary sources, identify bias, compare and contrast accounts, and ultimately synthesize information from multiple sources to create accurate narratives and timelines (Lent, 2017). While a concise (and visually appealing) resource, these practices cannot be taken exactly as they are, especially in K-12 schools. Underpinning these practices is the fact that the sources, accounts, and information to be interpreted are often one-sided, missing or entirely misrepresenting perspectives. What is required of educators [and students], then, is that the disciplines themselves are approached as pathways to social change, by which their texts, practices, and ways of knowing are continually questioned and reconstructed.

In our fifth-grade Causes of the American Revolution History Unit, this took the form of seeking out the perspectives of Black Americans, which were limited within district-provided textbooks and readily accessible primary and secondary sources in online databases. The very process of hunting for inclusive texts opened up a conversation between me and my fifth-graders: Why are only some perspectives prioritized, and, in turn, how can we amplify the voices of Black Americans when studying United States’ history? The snapshots below not only capture our search for multiple perspectives but also our reflections on the importance of doing so.

Questioning disciplinary texts can lead to the construction of inclusive and accurate pictures of history. When examining the Boston Massacre as one ‘cause’ of the American Revolution, for example, I noticed that our district textbook centers Paul Revere’s engraving, “The Bloody Massacre,” where British soldiers are depicted armed, against a row of white colonists, some wounded, some reaching to help one another, and some fleeing the square. While a biased depiction of the event itself, as many colonists, too, threw rock-filled snowballs at the soldiers, a key participant, Black American Crispus Attucks, is missing from the scene. I searched for alternate depictions of the event, pairing Paul Revere’s engraving with John H. Bufford’s, “Boston Massacre, March 5th, 1770,” which places Crispus Attucks front and center (Museum of the American Revolution, 2021). After joining the illustrations in a text set, my role in questioning texts, fifth-graders then compared and contrasted the accounts through a socratic seminar – drawing upon both to establish colonist and soldier involvement, infer deeper meanings, such as Attucks’ actions as a symbol of protection and independence, and contextualize the 13 Colonies as rooted in racism, a system perpetuated even in the media. By questioning which texts were included, and later, their contents, students were able to compare and contrast accounts to make sense of an event in its entirety and its connections to society at large.

Questioning disciplinary texts can amplify the joy and brilliance of Black Americans throughout history. Students’ inclusion and discussion of Attucks as a champion of independence and positive, social change left us eager to extend this work into writing. Using teacher, student, and librarian collected texts on Black Americans from the Revolutionary Era, including Crispus Attucks, Salem Poor, and Phillis Wheatley, students crafted biographies of their chosen ‘Revolutionary Hero.’ Only, when constructing the narratives or timelines of their hero’s role in the Revolution, students asserted the importance of learning from them today: Wheatley’s poems a means of social justice that can be continued today, Attucks an example of what it means to be a patriot, and Poor a symbol of unwavering bravery. By seeking out multiple accounts of history, students reconstructed the discipline by creating texts that amplified the perspectives and contributions of Black Americans that should have been included all along.

This Causes of the American Revolution Unit simply puts into action the pursuits of Dr. Gholdy Muhammad’s Historically Responsive Literacy Framework, where she asserts criticality, or examining and disrupting power structures, as a non-negotiable of teaching and learning (2023). Not only does criticality build empathy, connection, and perspective, but it allows us to understand the world [and the disciplines] entirely – to seek and sustain social justice. Beautifully, this often looks like pushing the disciplines themselves. As my fifth-graders engaged in reflective discussion on their reading and writing in consideration of multiple perspectives, they shared things like, “Why isn’t it [history] always done this way? Otherwise, we wouldn’t know the full story!” Their comments demonstrate the power of criticality as well as the brilliance and readiness of students to change the disciplines in the pursuit of racial justice.

References

Muhammad, G. (2023). Unearthing joy: a guide to culturally and historically responsive teaching and learning. Scholastic Inc.

Lent, R. (2017). Disciplinary literacy: a shift that makes sense. ASCD Express, 12(12).

Museum of the American Revolution. (2021, March 5). Boston massacre and propaganda: changing depictions of Crispus Attucks. https://www.amrevmuseum.org/boston-massacre-and-propaganda-changing-depictions-of-crispus-attucks. 

Jessica McCullough is a fifth-grade teacher in Southeastern PA. She is certified in grades 4-8, all subjects 4-6 and English Language Arts and Reading 7-8. She is currently a literacy M.Ed. student at West Chester University of PA with research interests in critical and disciplinary literacy.

‘Risky Texts’: Addressing the issue of race and historical marginalisation in the classroom

Blog

By Sarah Ryan-Purcell

“I teach in an all-white classroom and so I don’t have any of your books in my classroom”

(Brooklyn Academy of Music Organisation, 2017).

As I listened to author Jacqueline Woodson share this quote from an unnamed educator during an interview on “difficult” subjects in young people’s literature, I felt exposed. I taught in an all-white classroom in Ireland last year. I don’t recall placing or using a single book by a Black author in my classroom. At the time, I might have reasoned – subconsciously – that such texts are more relevant in the American context. Suffice to say, I’ve come a long way. 

            My reading list is not the only thing that has changed since I commenced my Masters in Literacy Education at West Chester University, Pennsylvania. I have developed a whole new perspective on how knowledge is constructed, whose voices are represented, and what it means to prepare our students to participate in a diverse, yet unequal, world.

            I discovered Woodson’s picture books in the first semester of my Master’s program as Dr. Daris McInnis challenged us to select a ‘risky text’ which we could use as a read-aloud opportunity to engage in critical literacy with our students. I chose Mason’s (2010) These Hands, an intergenerational book in which a young boy named Joseph learns how his grandfather united with fellow Black labourers to protest racism in the workplace. Thanks to their actions, Joseph’s hands – and other hands the same colour as his – can do “anything in this whole wide world”! The choice felt risky, particularly for me. Since arriving to America, I have felt discomfort when discussing race with BIPOC students. I imagine that the students might be thinking, “Who does she think she is, teaching us about something she knows nothing about?”. However, over the past few months, I have learned to embrace this vulnerability. By allowing the students to see me learning alongside them, I shift the classroom dynamic. Authority becomes shared and knowledge becomes co-constructed. Enter: critical literacy.

            I started the read-aloud with a guided discussion of the front cover, using visual thinking strategies (VTS, 2021). One child excitedly exclaimed, “my skin!” as she pointed to the boy on the front cover of the book. Another student remarked that the boy’s skin colour would probably be a significant aspect of the storyline because “it always is”.

That comment lingered with me.

            Why is race “always” central when Black characters appear? Why are there so few books where Black children are simply present—neither celebrated nor victimized, but existing as fully realized protagonists? The answer, no doubt, lies in power. Perhaps an increase in publications of such books would mitigate the sense of ‘otherness’ that is still apparent in today’s society.      I was particularly uncomfortable discussing the contents of the fifth page, as I wondered aloud why the grandfather had not been allowed to mix the dough in the Wonder Bread factory. The students, though young, were keenly aware that this was a restriction placed on Black people by their white employers. At this point, we began to discuss instances of power in the story. Most of the students participating in this read-aloud were Black, and I felt a sense of guilt on the part of white people for the injustice represented in the story. The students readily noted that white people wouldn’t eat bread baked by a Black person, even if the Black workers were allowed to bake it. I felt almost as though I was further oppressing them as I prompted them to consider why white people wouldn’t eat bread baked by a Black person. They concluded that white people believed Black people ‘had germs’ and would ‘make them sick’. The students were not only offering their opinions. They were engaging in interdisciplinary meaning-making, drawing connections between history, social studies, and personal knowledge. Upon reflection, I realize the impact of that discussion in helping these students to own their history and learn about the oppression of their relatives in the not-so-distant past. However, in the moment, I felt as though I was unearthing generational trauma.  

            Our read-aloud session was an embodiment of critical literacy as the students interrogated historical social practices and analyzed dynamics of power in society (Lewison et al., 2008). However, one important aspect was absent from our discussion: taking initial actions to promote social justice. Consequently, my next step is to consider how I might develop this standalone read-aloud lesson into a critical literacy unit plan on racism and workplace discrimination. Racism is not simply a topic to be covered, but rather anti-racism and inclusion are values to be instilled across the curriculum, values which the students can uphold beyond their formal education. In reflecting upon this read-aloud, I am prompted to identify ways through which I could support my students to “disrupt the commonplace” and promote social justice in small but meaningful ways (Lewison et al., 2008, p.9). This is a question I do not yet have an answer to, but I shall pursue the answer across my career. 

            In conclusion, engagement with this risky text read-aloud challenged me to step out of my comfort zone as a teacher. By leaning into discomfort and allowing students’ voices to guide our discussion, I witnessed the power of risky texts to illuminate social injustices, leading students to connect historical oppression with contemporary realities. This experience has demonstrated that teaching about race and inequality is not simply a “nice to have” in the curriculum but is rather a moral necessity. As a result, I am committed to creating spaces where all students, particularly those from marginalized communities, feel valued and empowered to challenge the status quo. 

            I have come to understand that what is not in the classroom library can often tell you more about the classroom environment than what is available for reading. Furthermore, when educators embed dimensions of critical literacy into their classroom practice, they not only nurture critical thinkers but rather empower both themselves and their students to be agents of change. 

References

Brooklyn Academy of Music Organisation (2017, June 21). Jacqueline Woodson on “difficult” subjects in young people’s literature. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcRwYLHcyzc

Lewison, M., Leland, C., & Harste, J. C. (2008). Creating critical classrooms: K-8 reading and writing with an edge. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Mason, M. (2010) These hands. Haughton Mifflin Harcourt.

Visual Thinking Strategies (2021) VTS, available: https://vtshome.org [accessed 03 May 2021].

Sarah Ryan-Purcell is a passionate primary school teacher from Cork, Ireland. Having obtained a B. Ed. in Education and Psychology at Mary Immaculate College, Limerick, Sarah is now pursuing a M. Ed. in Literacy Education at West Chester University, Pennsylvania where she is also working as a graduate assistant in the College of Education and Social Work. A proponent of discovery-based learning, Sarah loves to explore new countries, languages, and cultures, increasingly allowing these experiences to guide her classroom practice.

Doing History, Not Memorizing It: Using Historical Thinking to Reclaim Black Narratives

Blog

by Dr. Shari Revels-Davis

Growing up, history class always felt like a timeline of dates, names, and events to memorize. Textbooks presented historical accounts as settled truth—rarely revealing that history is constructed through sources, perspectives, and power.

When Black history is taught this way, students often receive a simplified version of complex struggles and resistance movements, stripped of grassroots voices and community leadership. History books also record only the story of the oppressor, not that of the oppressed. For example, Ron DeSantis, the current governor of Florida, stated in his defense of the presentation of slavery in the history books, as well as annexing the AP Black History high school courses and eliminating other courses that are considered “DEI” by the white population.

DeSantis defended Florida’s 2023 Black history standards, which included a requirement to teach that “slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit”. He argued that this clause, which suggests some enslaved people used their skills to their advantage, was intended to highlight the “resiliency” of Black Americans and was written by scholars.

Instead of taking the oppressor’s word on how historical events occurred, disciplinary literacy shifts history instruction from memorization to investigation.

By engaging in the authentic practices of historians, students learn to question narratives, analyze evidence, and uncover stories that have long been marginalized or erased.

The Discipline Lens: How Historians Build Knowledge

Historians do not simply read for information. They:

  • Source documents to understand who created them and why
  • Corroborate multiple perspectives
  • Contextualize events within social and political systems
  • Examine bias and purpose

These skills are essential for understanding Black history purposefully and honestly.

The Problem with Textbook Narratives

Traditional historical texts often:

  • Emphasize major political leaders over community organizers
  • Minimize systemic racism in favor of “progress narratives.”
  • Frame resistance as isolated moments rather than sustained movements

For example, the Civil Rights Movement is often portrayed as a few peaceful protests led by famous figures, while ignoring decades of organizing, youth activism, and local leadership.

So what does this look like in practice? Instead of replacing the textbook, we can place it in conversation with other voices. A primary source counterstory investigation allows students to analyze whose perspectives are centered—and whose are absent.

Classroom Strategy: Primary Source Counterstory Investigation

Step 1: Provide a textbook account of a historical event (e.g., voting rights, desegregation, Reconstruction)

Step 2: Pair it with primary sources such as:

  • Black newspapers
  • speeches
  • letters
  • oral histories
  • photographs

Step 3: Students analyze using inquiry prompts:

  • Who created this source?
  • What perspective is represented?
  • What details are emphasized or omitted?
  • How does power shape this narrative?

Step 4: Students construct a revised historical account that includes multiple voices.

Student Impact

Teachers I work with report that inquiry-based history instruction leads to:

  • Deeper comprehension of historical causation
  • Increased engagement
  • Stronger argument writing
  • Greater awareness of systemic injustice

Students move from passive consumers of information to critical interpreters of the past.

Concluding Thoughts

History is not neutral. It is shaped by the voices we amplify and the ones we overlook. When we present historical struggles like the Civil Rights Movement as a handful of peaceful protests led by a few famous figures, we unintentionally flatten decades of organizing, youth activism, and local leadership into a simplified storyline. Our students deserve more than a highlight reel.

As educators, we have the opportunity—and responsibility—to complicate the narrative. By inviting students to examine primary sources, question dominant accounts, and seek out counterstories, we teach them that history is not something to read and forget but something to investigate and explore. We help them see that change is collective, contested, and ongoing.

Doing history in this way builds more than content knowledge. It builds critical thinkers who understand that whose story is told matters—and that they, too, are part of the historical record in the making.

Shari Revels-Davis is a dedicated and experienced educator passionate about multilingual learning and educational equity. As a veteran teacher, she has made significant contributions to the field of education, particularly in supporting multilingual learners (MLL). In addition to her work as an MLL teacher for the Chester County School District, she is the founder of the Hiram Revels East Educational Foundation, which focuses on advancing educational opportunities for diverse student populations.

Shari is currently waiting to be conferred her doctoral dissertation from Jackson State University after earning two master’s degrees. In addition, she is working to fulfill her goal of opening her own boarding school for underprivileged students in Las Cruces, New Mexico.

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.

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.