This chapter is about Common Core style Close Reading, which isn’t something taught in either Well-Trained Mind style classical education, or Charlotte Mason style classical education. This kind of literature analysis on steroids is quite possibly my least favorite activity on Earth, behind washing dishes.
Close Reading is the methodical breaking down of the language and structure of a complex passage to establish and analyze its meaning. Teaching students to do it requires layered reading and asked sequenced, text-dependent questions; and it should end whenever possible with mastery expressed through writing.Reading Reconsidered
I think this chapter is worthwhile because this style of close reading is tested on major assessments, like the SAT. For example, when I reviewed a Pennsylvanian 4th grade summative assessment, and answered the Close Reading sample questions, I got them wrong because I used my background knowledge, instead of an incorrect answer that corresponded with questionable inferences from the text.
Assessments based on this style of reading are intentionally dumbing down reading comprehension by sticking to only what can be decoded from the “four corners of the text.”
Close reading is how the Common Core ELA standards handle students with poor reading skills, and in turn, makes texts incomprehensible even to the authors. As per Reading Reconsidered, “Close Reading is the tool that allows students to read text that is over their heads”, which begs the question of reading comprehension.
Ironically, the explicit assumption in Reading Reconsidered is that close reading gives students “the ability to wrestle with the most demanding texts, interpret them independently, and understand why and how they mean what they do.” Another explicit assumption is that Close Reading helps students become familiar with genre styles.
In Reading Reconsidered‘s version of Close Reading, the student should explain in writing what the text says and be able how to use the text to answer “text-dependent questions”; there is only one right answer, and it must be found within solely within the words on the page, using multiple reads of a paragraph length snippet of text over the course of an hour or so.
If there is anything better designed to suck the joy out of reading, I’m not sure what it is. Reading Reconsidered breaks Close Reading down into four common steps, “1) contiguous read, 2) initial writing to Check For Understanding, 3) reread with text-dependent questions, 4) final writing.”
What they call “Layered Reading,” is broken down into three types, which can be used independently or concurrently:
- “Contiguous Read” — just keepin’ on truckin’ through the whole thing, often read aloud in the classroom with the occasional vocabulary word defined as they read
- “line-by-line read” — just as dreadful as it sounds, answering multiple questions about a single sentence or line of poetry. “Who is they? Is this a good or a bad thing? Why didn’t the author mention _____? Why did the author choose that word?” Of course, even though the author isn’t there to gift you with their insight, and literature professors have been arguing about word choice for centuries, there is only one right answer, and it must only come from the text, not your knowledge of the author or the context in which the text is written, etc.
- “leapfrog read” — this is skimming to find how the author treated key words or phrases, and then answering inferential questions–only using the text, and there is only one right answer. Reading Reconsidered suggests using this technique as early as second grade.
- “Where is ___ first mentioned? What is it doing? Is this positive or negative? What is the object of ____? What is the result of ____? What will happen if ____ continues? What’s being described as ____? Give one literal and one figurative reason why the author would describe _____ that way.”
- “Underline _____. The author chose ____ adjectives. How would the effect have been different if they’d chosen _____? What kinds of things are ____? What is the author implying? Why does the author say ____? What is the object of _____?”
- “Under the phrase _____. Compare it to ______. The last time ____ was mentioned it was ____? Now we’re sure the author is comparing it to a ____. What is it doing? In your notes, briefly describe the role of ____.”
“Unless the conversation starts with a deep understanding of the specifics of what Shakespeare wrote rather than some generalized proximity of it, the discussion is not an exercise in reading. It is a substitute activity–a philosophical discussion about issues raised in a text…such discussions don’t generally teach students to read deeply.”Reading Reconsidered
For classical homeschoolers, using literature to engage in the Great Conversation is the point rather than something to be avoided. Particularly for Well-Trained Mind style homeschoolers, reading or listening to “generalized proximity” versions of the text as youngsters allows for deeper reading of text specifics later. It’s arguable that Common Core style Close Reading puts the cart before the horse.
Paraphrase vs Summary vs Narration
Reading Reconsidered distinguishes between a paraphrase (“a restatement of the sentence in simpler and clarified terms that still capture all of the explicit meaning and as much of the connotation as possible” in the same tense, syntax, and POV) and a summary (“a statement about the text from 3rd person POV with simplified language focusing on relevant information.”) Most narrations are summaries, but Reading Reconsidered has a preference for paraphrases.
Text Dependent Questions (TDQs)
TDQs are divided into word or phrase level questions, sentence or line level questions, and paragraph or stanza level questions. All three types can either be questions to establish meaning, or questions to analyze meaning. Reading Reconsidered points out that instructors can switch back and forth between types and kinds of questions and zoom in and out from word choice to paragraph analysis. You’ll note that these are not the typical kinds of questions we use when talking about books we read as classical homeschoolers.
First they offer three types of word or phrase level questions: referent questions (“What is ‘it’?”), denotation questions (“What are ___? What would have to be true for ____ to happen? What might that show about _____?”) and explanation questions (“What does ____ mean? How is it different from ____?”)
Next they offer four types of sentence-level questions: paraphrase questions, key line questions (“What does this sentence tell us about ___ and why is that important?”), reference questions (“Who is ___ talking about?”), and sentence structure questions (“Why does the author _____ at the beginning/end/middle of each sentence?”).
Finally, they offer four types of paragraph/stanza level questions: summary questions, delineation questions (“trace the elements of the argument” or “trace the sequence of events in the narrative”), and finite evidence questions (“Find all/multiple/# of pieces of evidence throughout the section.”)
First they offer five types of word or phrase level questions: word pattern questions (anaphora, etc), connotation questions (implied meaning based on associations and how this affects meaning or tone), figurative vs literal meaning (Not what, but why and how. “Why personification here? Why a simile comparing to X rather than Y?”), sensitivity analysis (Why this word and not that one?), missing word analyses (“Why wouldn’t the author mention ____?)
Next they offer four types of sentence-level questions: key line question (“What might it accomplish to express the idea with such subtlety? What other similar lines are in the book? Why would the author keep ____ hidden/explicit in this type of work?”), allusion questions (“What is the allusion? Why use it?”), figurative language questions (asks about the meaning of imagery or nonliteral language such as simile, metaphor, symbolism, analogy, etc), and pattern questions (ask about a pattern in structure, syntax, or sound and how that affects meaning).
Finally, they offer three types of paragraph/stanza level questions: paragraph function (“Look carefully at paragraph number __ and ___. How has the author shifted the use of ____ and the degree to which they are using ____? Why are they making the shift? How does this build from ____?”), dramatic irony (difference between their own knowledge and that of characters within the narrative), extended metaphor/allegory question (ask students to trace a metaphor across multiple lines of text).
Global Level Questions
Last, but not least, they offer “global-level” questions for use after Close Reading, to apply insights to a large section of text.
- convention alignment analyses — compare and contrast to genre styles and how that creates meaning
- intratextual motifs and discourse — analyze the connection between different parts of a text or how a motif shows up elsewhere in the text
- intertextual discourse — analyze the explicit or implicit connections between a given text and other specific texts
- ambiguity questions — analyze what is left unstated or unresolved
- part-to-whole questions — what role this scene/chapter/excerpt plays in the context of the larger work
Writing About Reading is Not Optional
I can just hear all the classical homeschoolers taking a sharp, in-drawn breath. Yes, Reading Reconsidered insists that students not only write about literature, but also argue about it–but only teacher-approved arguments, of course.
One Ring to Rule Them All
That’s because Reading Reconsidered says that teachers should be “modeling how to ‘argue a line,’ tracing a theme, a motif, a conflict, or an image through the complexity of a text. Teachers are encouraged to be “de-emphasizing certain aspects of the text to facilitate” this process–AKA, ensuring that students write up the right answer “by analyzing specific details from the text” that the teacher has shown them.
Big Little Lessons
Noting that teachers will begin with the end in mind, Reading Reconsidered encourages teachers to march students through this joy-filled process every single day, even if only in 10-15 minute stints of prepared bits like epigraphs, or by accident when students take unplanned detours away from the approved line of argument. Teachers are encouraged to have students re-read bits three and four times, asking TDQs until they come up with the right answers.
I suspect that this is why I ended up reading a play a week during my college-level Shakespeare class, doggedly writing a weekly essay about the “play within a play” in every single week’s reading. And this would be why I don’t read “literature” anymore–only genre fiction and nonfiction.
While most classical style homeschoolers will not be running their second-graders through this process–and possibly not even their high schoolers–I think it’s important that homeschoolers understand the concepts behind Common Core style Close Reading.
While college bound students will need to learn genre conventions, typical literature analysis techniques, and all the accompanying vocabulary, like motif and allegory, nowadays they’ll also need to be prepared to deal with the expectation that they are only to write about the approved text, using no outside information to inform their writing, making the correct argument they’re to discern from the way the question is asked. Most will not find this particularly onerous, but it is a hoop they need to learn to jump through.