There are ten 9–12 anchor standards for reading organized into the following four domains (see NGA & CCSSO, 2010a, p. 10).
1. Key Ideas and Details
2. Craft and Structure
3. Integration of Knowledge and Ideas
4. Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity
These anchor standards are directly linked to two parts in the Reading strand at grades K–12: Literature and Informational Text. In addition, a second set of grades 6–12 Reading standards addresses literacy in history and social studies, science, and technical subjects (see NGA & CCSSO, 2010a, pp. 60–62). The anchor standards for the content areas remain the same as those articulated for English language arts. However, the grade-level standards reflect the discipline-specific applications of reading in content-area instruction. In this book, we confine our review of the CCSS to English language arts, as implemented by English teachers. We will examine each of these parts in this chapter, after first discussing the anchor standards in more detail.
Key Ideas and Details
The three anchor standards in this domain describe the explicit and implicit comprehension of readers as they glean the purposes and main points of the text. In addition, the domain emphasizes the importance of being able to follow plot, character development, and themes, all necessary for literary analysis.
Source: Adapted from NGA & CCSSO, 2010a, pp. 35, 38.
Figure 2.1: Guiding questions for grade-by-grade analysis of the Reading standards.
Visit go.solution-tree.com/commoncore for a reproducible version of this figure.
1. Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text. (R.CCR.1)
2. Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas. (R.CCR.2)
3. Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over the course of a text. (R.CCR.3) (NGA & CCSSO, 2010a, p. 10)
Craft and Structure
The three anchor standards in this domain discuss the reader’s ability to analyze texts at the micro and macro levels. Readers should attend to the author’s craft in how he or she purposefully uses word choice, literary techniques, and organizational structures to shape the text; a character’s voice and experiences; or the interaction between the choice of genre and the information shared.
4. Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining technical, connotative, and figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word choices shape meaning or tone. (R.CCR.4)
5. Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text (e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole. (R.CCR.5)
6. Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text. (R.CCR.6) (NGA & CCSSO, 2010a, p. 10)
Integration of Knowledge and Ideas
In this domain, anchor standards seven through nine are dedicated to the content within and across texts, in print and in digital environments. Anchor standard seven (R.CCR.7) is also closely tied to the Writing anchor standard domain Research to Build and Present Knowledge (see NGA & CCSSO, 2010a, p. 21), as well as the Speaking and Listening domain Comprehension and Collaboration (see NGA & CCSSO, 2010a, p. 24). Anchor standard eight (R.CCR.8) on argumentation is not addressed in the Literature part as it is not applicable to these text types.
7. Integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse media and formats, including visually and quantitatively, as well as in words. (R.CCR.7)
8. Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence. (R.CCR.8)
9. Analyze how two or more texts address similar themes or topics in order to build knowledge or to compare the approaches the authors take. (R.CCR.9) (NGA & CCSSO, 2010a, p. 10)
Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity
The tenth and final anchor standard for reading has arguably been the predominant topic of discussion about the CCSS ELA.
10. Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently. (R.CCR.10) (NGA & CCSSO, 2010a, p. 10)
The Common Core ELA and its appendices devote a considerable amount of space to this standard, noting that students’ use of complex texts has diminished since at least the 1970s, while texts used in college and the workplace have not (Chall, Conard, & Harris, 1977; Hayes, Wolfer, & Wolfe, 1996; NGA & CCSSO, 2010b). The CCSS advocate for a staircase approach to systematically raising reading comprehension and critical thinking through the purposeful use of complex texts that require students to stretch their cognitive and metacognitive abilities (NGA & CCSSO, 2010a). For students who struggle with reading, this means that they must be taught with complex texts and asked to read increasingly complex texts across the year. It is important to note, however, that the text alone should not be the only scaffold; instruction is critical for these students to progress and accelerate.
Text complexity is defined across three dimensions: (1) quantitative measures, (2) qualitative factors, and (3) reader and task considerations. Quantitative factors, using a mixture of word length, sentence length, and syllables, are familiar to high school educators. In addition, many readability formulae calculate the number of difficult words that appear in a text by comparing these to grade-level lists. Examples of quantitative measures include the Fry Readability Formula, Dale-Chall Readability Formula, and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Index (see Fisher, Frey, & Lapp, 2012), as well as commercial ones such as ATOS (used by Accelerated Reader), Source Rater (Educational Testing Service), Pearson Reading Maturity Scale (Pearson Education), Degrees of Reading Power (Questar), and Lexile (MetaMetrics). Table 2.1 compares these readability scales. Published quantitative reading scores can provide a platform for professional learning communities to begin their examination of which texts to use with their students.
Table 2.1: Text Complexity Ranges Within Grade Bands
Source: CCSSO, 2012.
The Lexile measures used in the CCSS have been revised; consequently, the measures in table 2.1 differ from those provided in appendix A of the Common Core for ELA (see NGA & CCSSO, 2010b, p. 8). For example, the original range for the grades 9–10 band was 960–1115L compared to the revised range of 1050–1335L. Similarly, the original range for the 11–CCR grade band was 1070–1220L compared to the revised range of 1185–1385L. Lexile measures are based on word frequency (semantic difficulty) and sentence length (syntactic complexity), both of which have been shown to be effective predictors of text difficulty (Lennon & Burdick, 2004).
While quantitative reading formulae are calculated by machine, qualitative factors