The Magic of Wondering: Building Understanding Through Online Inquiry

The ability to ask questions is essential to learning, reasoning, and understanding. This column introduces a sequence of activities that incorporate the use of digital images and online texts into intentional opportunities for even the youngest learners to work with their teachers and classmates as they wonder, anticipate, explore, and think deeply about things that matter to them

Writing in the Disciplines: How Math Fits Into the Equation [post-print]

© 2018 International Literacy Association Writing is an important mode of thinking and learning for elementary students. Consistent efforts have been made to encourage discipline-specific writing, yet defining qualities of elementary mathematical writing have historically been underdeveloped. This article offers educators a new framework that conceptualizes mathematical writing as writing to reason and to communicate mathematically. Specifically, the framework defines four types of elementary mathematical writing: exploratory, informative/explanatory, argumentative, and mathematically creative. The authors explain and explore these types and their associated purposes through classroom vignettes. Informed by existing practices in mathematics and writing, strategies are offered to support teachers in the implementation of mathematical writing

Sentence Stems That Support Reading Comprehension

Sentence stems are widely used by teachers, but what do we know about developing sentence stems and using them effectively? Sentence stems are intended to facilitate students’ participation in academic conversations and writing and support students to develop the language expected in school, but sometimes the stems do not provide the support intended. The authors explain how to develop supportive sentence stems

Of Research reviews and practice guides: Translating rapidly growing research on adolescent literacy into updated practice recommendations.

The demand for evidence-based instructional practices has driven a large supply of research on adolescent literacy. Documenting this supply, Baye, Inns, Lake, and Slavin’s 2019 article in Reading Research Quarterly synthesized far more studies, with far more rigorous methodology, than had ever been collected before. What does this mean for practice? Inspired by this article, I investigated how this synthesis compared with the 2008 U.S. Institute of Education Sciences practice guide for adolescent literacy. I also include two contemporary documents for context: Herrera, Truckenmiller, and Foorman’s (2016) review and the U.K. Education Endowment Foundation’s 2019 practice guide for secondary schools. I first examine how these documents define adolescent, reading, and evidence, and propose more inclusive definitions. I then compare their respective evidence bases, finding that the quality and quantity of evidence have dramatically changed. Only one of the 34 studies in the 2008 U.S. practice guide met Baye et al.’s inclusion criteria in 2019, and the average sample size in Baye et al.’s studies was 22 times as large as those in the 2008 U.S. practice guide. I also examine the potential implications for a new practice guide’s instructional recommendations and comment on the expansion of research in technology, disciplinary literacy, and writing—topics scarcely covered in the 2008 U.S. practice guide but which have been extensively researched since then. Finally, I call for revision of the U.S. practice guide and the establishment of standing committees on adolescent literacy to help educators translate the latest research findings into updated practices