26
A relationship exists between Close Reading (CR) and Text Analysis (TA), yet the clarity of that relationship is not always clear. Are these procedures fraternal twins or second cousins? Both procedures aim to help students improve comprehension of narrative and informational texts, and both involve rereading a difficult passage a few times. When elementary teachers skillfully scaffold reading instruction based on developmentally appropriate practices, they enable young readers to apply text analysis and close reading to their literacy practices.
Scaffolded instruction involves teachers’ adjusting the supports they place during instructional interactions with students based on students’ learning needs. The chief aim of scaffolding text analysis is to facilitate students’ reading comprehension and to gradually enable them to independently apply accurate strategies they have been taught. The gradual release of responsibility framework (Pearson & Gallagher, 1983), commonly referred to as I do, We do, You do, is a conduit to aid students’ independence for strategic learning. Modeling of any new processes to be learned is critical before students in grades 1 to 5 are expected to independently apply close reading, text analysis, or any newly learned strategy.
Proficient reading comprehension is an essential process for elementary students, and a critical instructional goal for their teachers. Young students will use their instructional and independent literacy skills beyond the elementary years as they continue their educational journeys toward college and career preparedness.
Elementary teachers who are adept at scaffolding instruction for their students know when and how to provide the scaffolds necessary to move students along in the learning process. Vygotsky’s theories of learning and development (2012, 1962; Kurt, 2020) which emphasized the central role of language in learning, serve as the foundation of scaffolding the teacher-student interactions which enable students to take a more active role in their own learning and exhibit less dependence on their teachers.
At times, scaffolding may be necessary for only one or two students; at other times, for the entire class. The purpose of scaffolding instruction is to maximize students’ learning with strategic support to transition them from current conceptual strengths, what they know well right now, to building upon those conceptual strengths to newly learned concepts, ideas, and processes.
Elementary students learn to read more than the text; they learn to read the task: what is it that the teacher expects me to do? Do I know how to proceed? Elementary teachers provide support for students’ learning by their careful observation and assessment of students’ needs during lessons across the curriculum. Today, in the age of national and state standards and the tests that accompany them, elementary teachers are encouraged, urged, and even mandated to teach the skills of close reading and text analysis. This article examines the relationship between text analysis and close reading. Explicit examples of scaffolded instruction of close reading and text analysis at the primary and upper elementary levels are provided, and recommendations are shared for those who oversee curricular goals for elementary students.
One key tenet of close reading is students’ exposure to complex text, but what does complex text look like at each of the elementary grades? Choosing a complex text for instruction does not mean that first graders should be reading Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, although that would typically be a difficult read for beginning readers. The book’s length, language, symbolism, and parodies would be beyond the average developmental milestones of first graders. Allington, McCuiston, and Billen (2015) caution educators that “harder texts” do not make more proficient readers, but rather texts which students can read with high levels of accuracy and comprehension promote proficient reading abilities.
The close reading of complex text refers to the reading and rereading of a short passage at or above grade level. The current literature on close reading emphasizes “deep discussions” based on what the text means and not solely what it states (Fisher & Frey, 2020). Close reading involves students’ examination of the language in the passage as well as identifying the author’s craft and intent (ILA, 2021; Snow & O’Connor, 2013). A full or partial informational article, or even a brief excerpt from a narrative piece, would be sufficient for practicing close reading. The short passage should be carefully selected by the teacher so that the concepts, vocabulary, and inferences gleaned from the passage are likely to elicit cogent responses from students in their discussions about the text and in their written commentary after a few rereadings. Rereading the same passage for a variety of purposes is key to close reading procedures as well as text analysis. Therefore, close reading of the same piece of text may take place over several instructional sessions.
However, there is a gap in the research regarding preparing primary grade students to use complex texts (Ensley & Rodriguez, 2019). At the primary level, close reading is likened to shared reading in that it involves strong support by teachers as students engage with more challenging texts (Ensley & Rodriguez, 2019). Hinchman’s and Moore’s notion of a “staircase of complexity (2013) is inherent in scaffolding text analysis throughout the elementary grades: mounting a staircase begins with careful first steps. That staircase involves students actively comparing ideas within a text or across multiple texts and genres.
Reading comprehension is the integration of text-based ideas and the world knowledge the reader brings to the reading task. Therefore, comprehension processes vary according to text difficulty and why one is reading a particular text (Duke, Ward, & Pearson, 2021). When students demonstrate their comprehension, they make their thinking about what they’ve read known to others through ideas shared in discussion and even in what they write about the text they’ve read.
Close reading is always a part of the process of analyzing text. A one-time-read, inadequate and superficial for providing a focused analysis of what one reads, does not promote making inferences, interpretation, or higher level thinking. Proficient self-regulated readers often reread for clarity whether reading for an instructional task or for personal enjoyment. As they encounter a problem understanding what they’ve read, rereading a phrase, sentence, or section may add clarity to difficult vocabulary or concepts. Additional exposures to the words and concepts of a text give the reader opportunities to correct previous misconceptions (Mesmer, 2016).
Teachers encourage rereading of text when students struggle, or when they present an alternative purpose for reading a passage. When teachers scaffold reading assignments, they guide students to become more productive in their close reading so that students can respond orally, sharing their own thoughts and building on what others say about their understanding of the text. Fisher and Frey (2012) remind teachers of the “power” of close reading to assist students in deepening discussions about texts. Elementary readers increase their capacity for close reading when scaffolded instruction gives them the power to do so.
According to Thompson and Lyons (2017), analysis of a text requires detailed examination of the elements or structure of a text. The analysis takes place when the reader considers each of the component parts of a text to discover interrelationships in order to draw a conclusion. Text analysis can be applied to both narrative and informational texts. However, it is important to note that analysis of text is not equally appropriate for all texts. One way that students “engage deeply” with text is by analyzing it for the relationships within and across sentences (Duke, Ward, & Pearson, 2021).
.
\