After reading the chosen books and focusing on what makes students struggle, I was able to identify four main themes that could complicate reading for students. These themes included the text structure, meaning, language features, and knowledge demands. From these themes, I extrapolated several specific concepts that could potentially case students to struggle reading classic literature. These concepts included a story-within-a-story device, the structure and linearity of the plot, the use of graphics, lack of general comprehension, the subtext, the comprehension of theme, conventionality, vocabulary, and sentence structure, a student’s background knowledge, engagement with the text, the Intertextuality, and student’s cultural knowledge.
From my literature review, I found that the conducted research was on either struggling readers and reading as a whole or classic literature, usually related to high school or college students. One conclusion that came out of my research is that text complexity needs to be balanced with other factors including student engagement and interest. This is important, especially when trying to meet the Common Core Learning Standards (CCSS, 2010). Text complexity is a concept that is very prominent in the Common Core and each book’s Lexile Level, which indicates an individual's reading ability or the difficulty of a text, is listed in the module, which is a group of lessons tied around a single theme. If a text is too difficult, without the proper scaffolding, which is when a teacher brings the student up to the level of the text with guided help, the students is unable to gain comprehension of the text they are reading. This is where student engagement and interest play a key role. If a teacher picks a complex text that is also engaging and interesting to the students, then the students will have better comprehension. Another conclusion that came out of my research is that there are many ways to work with
struggling readers in the classroom. “Teachers have a strong awareness of various coping skills used by struggling readers, but less of an understanding of how to mitigate and manage these behaviors in the classroom” (Moreau, 2014). Most teachers are trained to understand why students would struggle reading, but they are not trained on how to help these students in the classroom without using outside resources. If teachers understand why student struggle to read, and how to recognize these students, then they will be better prepared to help these students in the classroom. “Middle school teachers believe that their students should be competent grade level readers, and while it is their job to adapt the curriculum for their needs, it is not their job to improve reading skills” (Moreau, 2014). The last conclusion that came out of this research is that the CCSS’s are not being used in classrooms to benefit students. Most schools, with the implementation of the CCSS, made a decision whether to have their teachers use or adapt the modules provided for each grade level. However, teachers did not have any experience with the CCSS and therefore were unsure of how to use the modules and standards to meet the new goals set before them. Because of the implementation of the CCSS and the lack of teacher knowledge, teachers have used what knowledge they have to make decisions regarding what books they will teach and how they will teach them. However, the new standards require that students use critical thinking and show their learning in many different ways, making it more difficult for students who are behind to catch up.
After looking at the data related to struggling readers and classic literature, I found there are many ways to interpret the data that I found through my research. This data can be used to identify different ways that reading classic literature can be complicated for struggling readers, and indeed that was the main purpose of my research. However, this data can be used to identify the complexity of a text to see if it is at an appropriate level for the readers in a class. The data
could also help teachers to create mini-lessons to teach students about different text characteristics and literary devices they may encounter in classic literature. My personal reflections about the meaning of this data is that it can be used for more than the intended research, and that it can inform teachers about how to teach and read classic literature in the classroom.
After reviewing the data and looking at the current research related to struggling readers and classic literature, I was able to synthesize some implications and suggestions for practice in the classroom. An implication for teachers and stakeholders regarding the insight that content analysis can provide into reasons some students struggle to read classic literature is that teachers need to have the knowledge needed to teach these students. This means that teachers should be properly certified to teach the grade levels they are in and a schools administration needs to make sure that teachers are properly informed of new data and are educating themselves on this data. Teachers also need to make sure that they are being pro-active and attending training sessions that relate to the students and grade level they are teaching. An implication for teachers and stakeholders regarding text complexity is that teachers need to understand the CCSS and text complexity. The CCSS can be very difficult to understand, and when teachers are unsure on how to use the information provided in the CCSS, then they do not properly assign books to the class, resulting in the books being too easy or too difficult. Another implication that is loosely associated with this is that teachers need to have the proper training on how to implement the CCSS and meet the associated goals for each grade level. This is important because teachers need to understand what they are supposed to teach their students and how what they teach will be assessed. An implication regarding working with struggling readers is that classroom teachers need to learn to match students and texts. If teachers choose books that are both engaging and
interesting, they may be able to choose a book that would normally be too difficult for a student and provide the proper scaffolding in order for the student to comprehend what they are reading. Teachers also have to make sure that students are choosing recreational reading books that are within their reading level so that they experience success with reading and are willing to try reading difficult texts, such as classic literature. Another implication associated with matching students and texts is that teachers need to know different strategies to use when working with struggling readers. Some of these strategies could include tracking student confusion, establishing a purpose for reading, implementing student strategies and teacher tools, and setting a purpose and plan for reading. Teachers have to be able to spot when their students are using coping skills, and whether these skills are detrimental to the students learning. If teachers know what strategies they can suggest to their students, they may be able to get students to stop using coping skills and start using strategies that can be used in any subject. This requires training, observation, and reflection on the teacher’s part, but can be very rewarding for the students.
There are, however, a few limitations to the content analysis that was completed for this research. One limitation is that only a select group of six books chosen by the researcher was used as part of the data collection. In order for this study to be more impactful, added data from classic books analyzed under the same lens as the six chosen for this study would be needed. Another limitation would be that the researcher only focused on four grade levels, fifth through eighth, for the conclusions and implications. To make this study more relevant for a larger group of people, research would have to encompass more grade levels. This would tie into the first limitation, in that including more grade levels in the research would mean choosing classic literature from those grade levels to include in the data collection. The last limitation associated with this research is that no children were used as part of this study. To better understand how
classic literature complicates reading for students, a researcher could study children in a classroom setting reading classic literature and take anecdotal notes, conduct interviews with the students, teacher, and parents, and hand out surveys to use as part of the data collection.
After synthesizing my data, looking at current research related to my topic, and my conclusions and implications, there are some future research needs that I believe would be beneficial to this research. One future research need would be more time to spend on reading the chosen novels, making notes and coding those notes to understand the data thoroughly. This would allow for more conclusions and implications for practice to be found. Another research need would be the observation of students reading classic literature and regular conversations with students about their reading experiences. This would give the researcher more data to synthesize regarding the complications students face when reading classic literature. One last research need would be reading more classic literature novels to add a greater depth and scope to the data. This would allow me to draw out more potential complication students might face when reading classic literature and more implications for practice in the classroom.
The overall significance of this study was the research conducted on classic literature in conjunction with research conducted on struggling readers in middle school. I found that although there was research on these two topics individually, most research did not connect them and had no suggestions for teachers on how to read these books with their students. The contribution of this study was the combination of looking at the CCLS text complexity and aligning that with good teaching practices so that teachers had the ability to read classic literature in their classrooms and reach struggling readers. This qualitative content analysis helps to inform teachers about different pitfalls they may encounter as they teach necessary classic literature in their classroom, and different strategies they may use to reach all of their students.
References
Barone, D. (2011). Case Study Research. In Duke, N., & Mallette, M. (Eds.). Literacy research
methodologies (pages of chapter).(2nd Ed.). Guilford Press. Location: Publisher.
Bright, A. (2011). Writing Homer, reading Riordan: intertextual study in contemporary adolescent literature. Journal of Children’s Literature, 37(1), 38–47.
Casey, H. (2009). Intersections and interactions: A case study of seventh grade teacher's practices with struggling readers and writers. Journal of School Connections, 2(1), 23-45. Genishi, C & Dyson, A.H. (2009). Children, language, and literacy: diverse learners in Diverse
times. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Ivey, G. (1999). Reflections on teaching struggling middle school readers. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42, 372–381
Maine, F. & Waller, A. (2011). swallows and amazons forever: how adults and children engage in reading a classic text. Children’s Literature in Education, 42: 354-371.
Moreau, L. (2014). Who's Really Struggling? Middle School Teachers' Perceptions of Struggling Readers. Research In Middle Level Education Online, 37(10), 1-17.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in
history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors.
Ostenson, J., & Wadham, R. (2012). Young adult literature and the Common Core: a surprisingly good fit. American Secondary Education, 41(1), 4–13.
Rosenblatt, L.M. (1994). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literacy
Santoli, S. P., & Wagner, M. E. (2004). Promoting young adult literature: the other “real” literature. American Secondary Education, 33(1), 65–75.
Stahl, N. & Hartman, D. (2011). Historical Research. In Duke, N., & Mallette, M. (Eds.).
Literacy research methodologies (pp. 213-241).(2nd Ed.). Guilford Press.
Torgesen, J.K. & Hudson, R. (2006). Reading fluency: critical issues for struggling readers. In S.J. Samuels and A. Farstrup (Eds.). Reading fluency: The forgotten dimension of reading
success. Newark, DE: International Reading Association
Tovani, C. (2000). I read it, But I don’t get it: Comprehension strategies for adolescent readers.. Portland, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers
Vogt, M. & Shearer, B. A. (2011). Intervention at the Middle and High School Levels. No Eds.,
Reading Specialists and Literacy Coaches in the Real World (pp. 126-130). Boston, Massachusetts: Pearson Education.
Young, C. (2011). Perspectives on struggling readers. Retrieved from thebestclass.org
Youssef, L. (2009). A matter of relevance: teaching classics in the 21st century. College
Teaching, 58(1), 28–31.
Data Collection Books
Alcott, L.M. (1871, 1989). Little Women. New York, New York: Bantam Books. Hinton, S.E. (1967, 2006). The Outsiders. New York, New York: Penguin Books.
Lewis, C.S. (1950, 1970). The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe. New York, New York: Collier Books.
McCaffrey, A. (1976, 2003). Dragonsong. New York, New York: Aladdin Paperbacks.
O’Dell, S. (1960, 1988). Island of the Blue Dolphins. New York, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company
Appendices
Appendix 1
Books chosen to read for data collection:
Little Women by Louisa May Alcott (1983, 1989)
The Island of the Blue Dolphins by Scott O’Dell (1960, 1988)
The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton (1967, 2006)
The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis (1950, 1970)
Dragonsong by Anne McCaffrey (1976, 2003)
Where the Red Fern Grows by Wilson Rawls (1961, 2001)
Data Reading for:
1. Text Structure (TS) a) Organization (O) b) Use of Graphics (UG) 2. Meaning (M) 3. Language Features (LF) a) Conventionality (C) b) Vocabulary (V) c) Sentence Structure (SS) 4. Knowledge Demands (KD)
a) Life Experiences (LE)
b) Intertextuality and cultural knowledge (ICK)
Other Resources:
Common Core Learning Standards (CCLS) Grades 5-8 (2013) Common Core Modules Grades 5-8 (2013)
Appendix 2
Text Complexity: Qualitative Measures Rubric LITERATURE
Exceedingly Complex Very Complex Moderately
Complex
Slightly Complex
Text Structure
Organization: Is intricate
with regard to such elements as point of view, time shifts, multiple characters, storylines and detail
Use of Graphics: If used,
illustrations or graphics are essential for understanding the meaning of the text
Organization: May
include subplots, time shifts and more complex characters
Use of Graphics: If
used, illustrations or graphics support or extend the meaning of the text
Organization: May have
two or more storylines and occasionally be difficult to predict
Use of Graphics: If
used, a range of illustrations or graphics support selected parts of the text
Organization: Is
clear, chronological or easy to predict o
Use of Graphics: If
used, either directly assist in interpreting the text or are not needed to understand the meaning of the text
Language Features
Conventionality: Dense
and complex; contains abstract, ironic, and/or figurative language
Vocabulary: Complex,
generally unfamiliar, archaic, subject-specific, or overly academic language; may be ambiguous or purposefully misleading
Sentence Structure:
Mainly complex sentences with several subordinate clauses or phrases; sentences often contain multiple concepts
Conventionality:
Fairly complex; contains some abstract, ironic, and/or figurative language
Vocabulary: Fairly
complex language that is sometimes unfamiliar, archaic, subject-specific, or overly academic Sentence Structure: Many complex sentences with several subordinate phrases or clauses and transition words
Conventionality:
Largely explicit and easy to understand with some occasions for more complex meaning Vocabulary: Mostly contemporary, familiar, conversational; rarely unfamiliar or overly academic Sentence Structure:
Primarily simple and compound sentences, with some complex constructions Conventionality: Explicit, literal, straightforward, easy to understand Vocabulary: Contemporary, familiar, conversational language Sentence Structure: Mainly simple sentences
Meaning Meaning: Multiple
competing levels of meaning that are difficult to identify and interpret; theme is implicit or subtle, often ambiguous and revealed over the whole text
Meaning: Multiple
levels of meaning that may be difficult to identify or separate; theme is implicit or subtle and may be revealed over the whole text
Meaning: Multiple
levels of meaning clearly distinguished from each other; theme is clear but may be conveyed with some subtlety
Meaning: One level
of meaning; theme is obvious and revealed early in the text.
Knowledge Demands
Life Experiences: Explores
complex, sophisticated or abstract themes;
experiences portrayed are distinctly different from the common reader
Intertextuality and Cultural Knowledge:
Many references or allusions to other texts or cultural elements Life Experiences: Explores themes of varying levels of complexity or abstraction; experiences portrayed are uncommon to most readers Intertextuality and Cultural Knowledge: Some references or allusions to other texts or cultural elements
Life Experiences:
Explores several themes; experiences portrayed are common to many readers
Intertextuality and Cultural Knowledge:
Few references or allusions to other texts or cultural elements Life Experiences: Explores a single theme; experiences portrayed are everyday and common to most readers Intertextuality and Cultural Knowledge: No references or allusions to other texts or cultural elements
Adapted from Appendix A: Research Supporting Key Elements of the Standards, Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Studies and Science and Technical