For Omaha Public Schools
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Curriculum Review for Reading,
Grades K–12
February 2014
About McREL
McREL International is a nonprofit education and research organization based in Denver, Colorado,
with offices in Charleston, North Carolina; Nashville, Tennessee; Honolulu, Hawaii‘; and Melbourne,
Australia. McREL has more than 40 years of experience conducting research and evaluation,
developing resources and tools, and providing technical assistance, professional development, and
consultation in system improvement, the development of standards-based programs, student
assessment, evaluation and policy studies, strategic planning, out-of-school-time learning, and
leadership development. McREL’s client list includes federal, regional, and state agencies; school
districts; institutions of higher education; foundations; private organizations; and international entities.
McREL operates two large U.S. Department of Education-funded programs: Regional Educational
Laboratory Pacific (REL Pacific), and the North Central Comprehensive Center (NCCC). REL Pacific
is part of a network of ten laboratories that helps states, entities, districts, and schools make the best use
of their data systems; conducts high-quality research and evaluation; provides opportunities for
practitioners to learn about the best education research; and helps education policymakers and
practitioners incorporate data-based practices into regular decision making. The North Central
Comprehensive Center (NCCC), which serves the states of Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and
Wyoming, provides a range of research-based training and technical assistance to build state capacity
to implement the provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and help districts and schools
achieve the goals of the law through sustained support to districts and schools in need of improvement.
Our Web site (www.mcrel.org) offers hundreds of reports, tools, guides, and services designed to
improve school and student performance. If you have a question about McREL, contact us at
303.337.0990 or [email protected].
McREL International
4601 DTC Blvd., Suite 500
Denver, CO 80237-2596
Phone: 303.337.0990
Fax: 303.337.3005
www.mcrel.org
Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................................... 1
1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Key questions ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Materials reviewed ................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Omaha Public School’s Pacing Guides .......................................................................................................................... 3
The Nebraska Language Arts Standards ........................................................................................................................ 4
2. Findings .................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Curriculum alignment with the Nebraska State Content Standards .............................................................................. 5
Vertical alignment .............................................................................................................................................................. 5
Gaps and Overlaps ............................................................................................................................................................ 6
Rigor..................................................................................................................................................................................... 6
Curriculum areas worthy of praise ...................................................................................................................................... 7
Breadth of texts .................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Instructional supports ....................................................................................................................................................... 7
3. Vertical Alignment.................................................................................................................................................................. 8
Text difficulty across grades ................................................................................................................................................. 8
Identifying target student knowledge and skills ..............................................................................................................10
Summary of findings ...........................................................................................................................................................11
4. Gaps and Overlaps ...............................................................................................................................................................13
Gaps .......................................................................................................................................................................................13
Overlaps ................................................................................................................................................................................15
Summary of Findings ..........................................................................................................................................................18
5. Rigor .......................................................................................................................................................................................19
Difficulty of texts .................................................................................................................................................................19
Summary of Findings ..........................................................................................................................................................21
References ..................................................................................................................................................................................22
Appendix A ................................................................................................................................................................................23
Appendix B ................................................................................................................................................................................25
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
At the request of Omaha Public Schools, McREL International conducted an analysis of the
district’s curriculum for reading in order to evaluate how well they align with Nebraska
Language Arts Standards for kindergarten through grade 12. The review addressed the topics of
vertical alignment, content gaps and overlaps, and rigor. Analysts determined how well the
district curriculum is vertically aligned, whether it addresses all the content of the standards and
holds students to the level of performance indicated in the standards. In reviewing the material to
answer this question, analysts also identified those areas of the curriculum that are worthy of
praise, that is, positive attributes of the curriculum found during the analysis.
To answer how well the curriculum is vertically aligned across grade levels, the study examined
whether or not the texts for reading listed in the district pacing guides and supplemental reading
lists for each grade demonstrate a reasonable increase in difficulty over the previous grade, as
reflected by a readability score. The review also considered the degree to which the district
curriculum differentiates what students should learn at each grade level. Overall, the reading
texts presented in the pacing guides are vertically aligned, gaining in difficulty over time,
although there are some grades that do not advance or that dip slightly in difficulty when
compared to the prior grade.
To address whether or not there are content gaps and overlaps in the curriculum, analysts
reviewed district curriculum documents against the Nebraska Reading Standards. Gaps appear
when the Nebraska state standards are not addressed in the OPS curriculum, while overlaps
appear when particular texts are addressed repeatedly.
In a few cases, gaps were found; that is, there were indicators in the Nebraska standards that are
not addressed in the curriculum. Most notably, several indicators across topics in grade 8 were
not found in the curriculum documents.
In the case of overlaps, there were more than a dozen instances of the same reading texts listed in
different grades, and additional instances of texts listed in different quarters or units of the same
course in high school. These overlaps, as well as the gaps identified, should be considered and
addressed. However, these issues represent a very small portion of the overall curriculum.
To determine whether or not the district curriculum addresses the appropriate level of rigor,
analysts reviewed the texts identified in the district pacing guides for one aspect of difficulty, the
quantitative measure or readability score. Comparing the readability score of student reading
material to reading levels commonly associated with each grade range, including those reading
levels identified for the new Common Core text complexity requirements, provides some
indication of rigor in the district reading curriculum. The difficulty of texts read by students in
elementary school is on par with traditional measures and the Common Core, but the median
difficulty of texts read by students in the secondary grades is less difficult than both traditional
and new expectations, as recommended by the new Common Core standards.
The district curriculum successfully aligns with the Nebraska standards in a number of areas.
Specifically, the pacing guides and supplemental book lists identify reading material that shows
great breadth and diversity. In addition, there are ample supports to help teachers implement and
understand the focus of curricular units and resources.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
1
1. INTRODUCTION
Over the last fifteen years, McREL International (McREL) has provided standards review and
alignment services for more than seventy school districts, a dozen state departments of
education, education agencies in two U.S. territories, and the U.S. Departments of Defense and
Labor. At the request of Omaha Public Schools, McREL conducted an analysis of the district’s
curriculum for reading in order to evaluate how well they align with Nebraska Language Arts
Standards for kindergarten through grade 12. The review sought to answer 5 key questions about
the quality and effectiveness of the Omaha curriculum documents, including questions about
alignment, gaps and overlaps, and rigor. These key questions are described below, along with a
description of the documents and process used in the evaluation.
Key questions
The alignment review was designed to answer 5 key questions. There are two overarching
questions. These broad level questions address the alignment of the OPS curriculum to the
Nebraska standards and aspects of the OPS guides that are worthy of praise.
To what extent is the curriculum aligned with the Nebraska State Content Standards?
What areas of curriculum are worthy of praise?
In order to answer these questions, analysis focused on characteristics of the OPS curriculum
documents and their alignment with the Nebraska standards, asking specifically:
Is the curriculum aligned across grade levels (vertical alignment)?
What gaps and overlaps exists within the curriculum?
Does the curriculum demonstrate an appropriate level of rigor?
In order to understand the overall extent of curriculum alignment, analysts determined how well
the curriculum is vertically aligned, whether it addresses all the content of the standards and
holds students to the level of performance indicated in the standards. In reviewing the material to
address these topics, analysts identified those areas of the curriculum that are worthy of praise,
that is, positive attributes of the curriculum found during the analysis.
The review was conducted by McREL analysts with expertise in the subject area and experience
evaluating curriculum materials and standards. The content of the OPS curriculum was compared
to the Nebraska standards. The curriculum was evaluated against established criteria related to
each specific question. The results of the analysis were reviewed for quality assurance.
Materials reviewed
To conduct the study for reading, Omaha School District curriculum documents were collected
and reviewed. These documents and the Nebraska standards are described in greater detail in the
section that follows.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
2
Omaha Public School’s Curriculum Documents
The district curriculum for reading has different kinds of information and organization at each
grade span: elementary, middle, and high school. Appendix A provides a complete description of
the elements that make up each of the pacing guide documents reviewed. They are summarized
more generally here:
Grades K–6
Reading pacing guides focus on vocabulary and comprehension skills. They identify and
pace the Nebraska reading indicators across the year. These guides are based on the
Journeys reading program for K–2 and StoryTown reading program for grades 3–6.
Complete pacing guides address all strands of the language arts: reading, writing, oral
communication, and multiple literacies. They provide pacing information and focus
standards for each quarter.
First 20 Days with State Standards lists the Nebraska grades K–2 reading indicators that
are addressed each day and lists the days that each Nebraska grade level standard for
grades K–2 is addressed within the lessons planned for the first 20 days of school.
Scope and Sequence for Journeys reading program, grades K–2, provide an overview of
each unit of study, including the reading skills, sight words, vocabulary, and reading
selections that are addressed. Also reviewed was a Scope and Sequence document and
spreadsheet for Journeys that target phonological awareness skills.
OPS K–2 Reading Assessment Book, Teacher’s Edition, which targets early reading skills
and used for diagnostic and formative purposes.
Grades 7 & 8
Comprehensive pacing guides provide pacing information by quarter, including which
standards are addressed during each quarter. The guides list the title of works that
students may read during each quarter.
The Supplementary Books for English and Language Arts Classes, 2013–2014 identifies
reading material that has been approved for use in the district for each grade. Schools
may choose to purchase books that are the list. The list provides Lexile® levels for most
titles.
Grades 9–12
Course documents provide an overview of 4 courses: English 1–2, English 3–4, English
5–6, and English 7–8. These documents list texts, resources, and lessons under organizing
themes. Reading materials are specified for each course. Only grade 10 (English 3–4) and
grade 11 (English 5–6) identify the specific order that Nebraska standards should be
addresses during the school year.
The Supplementary Books for English and Language Arts Classes, 2013–2014 identifies
reading material that has been approved for use in the district for each grade. Schools
may choose to purchase books that are the list. The list provides Lexile® levels for most
titles.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
3
The district pacing documents vary considerably in the level and type of detail they provide.
Although this study focused on elements common to nearly all of them, the amount of data
available across grades was at times uneven. For example, the pacing guides for grades 7–12
identify many more titles of texts that teachers may choose to use with their students than the
pacing guides identify for grades K–6. Although students in elementary grades read books from
their classroom libraries that are not listed in the pacing guides, for the scope of this study there
were more titles to evaluate for each of the secondary grades than there were for each of the
elementary grades, so the data for secondary grades reflect the average of a greater number of
texts than are averaged for the elementary grades.
The Nebraska Language Arts Standards
The Nebraska Language Arts Standards organize student learning through comprehensive
standards, concepts, grade-level standards, and curricular indicators.
The content in the Nebraska Language Arts Standards is organized at the highest level by large
ideas or topics called comprehensive standards. These standards are broad statements of student
knowledge and skill related to reading, writing, speaking and listening, and multiple literacies.
Under each comprehensive standard there is a level of organization called concepts. There are
several concepts under each comprehensive standard. Concepts are words or phrases that serve to
group the grade-level standards by related topics. The majority of these concepts are present in
every grade, but a few concepts, such as Knowledge of Print and Phonological Awareness, are
present only in early elementary grades. The concepts in the language arts standards create a
coherent organizational layer that help orient the reader to the structure of the grade-level
standards and preview the breadth of content within a comprehensive standard.
The grade-level standards grouped under each concept are statements of knowledge and skill that
serve to further define the comprehensive standard in relation to each concept for each grade.
Grade-level standards are sometimes duplicated for more than one grade but often change in
order to differentiate student knowledge and skill for various grades. Just as not all concepts are
found in every grade, grade-level standards are provided only for those grades in which the
concept is present. As an organizing layer, the grade-level standards, along with their associated
concepts, organize the content beneath them.
The smallest level of organization in the Nebraska Language Arts Standards is the curricular
indicator. This is the level that articulates the specific knowledge and skills that are the goals of
student learning at each grade level, and it is the level most often cited in the Omaha Public
School’s curriculum documents.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
4
2. FINDINGS
This study focused on two overarching questions and three more specific questions. Findings
reported here are organized first by the general topics of alignment and areas worthy of praise,
and then further organized by the more specific topics of vertical alignment, gaps, overlaps, and
rigor. Greater details about each of these specific topics may be found in sections 4–6 of this
report.
Curriculum alignment with the Nebraska State Content Standards
The first overarching question posed in the study asks about the alignment of the OPS
curriculum to the Nebraska standards:
1. To what extent is the curriculum aligned with the Nebraska State Content Standards?
There are many aspects to consider in regards to the alignment between standards and
curriculum. The answer to this question summarizes the findings from the more specific
questions considered in this study, specifically how well the curriculum is vertically aligned,
addresses all the content of the standards, and holds students to the level of performance
indicated in the standards.
Overall, the reading texts presented in the pacing guides are vertically aligned, gaining in
difficulty over time, although there are some grades that do not advance or that dip slightly in
difficulty when compared to the prior grade. There are some gaps and overlaps in coverage that
should be addressed, though they do not represent a significant portion of the curriculum. The
difficulty of texts read by students in elementary school is on par with traditional measures but
below Common Core expectations. The median level of texts read by students in the secondary
grades is less difficult than both traditional and new expectations, as recommended by the new
Common Core standards. Details on these findings are provided in the sections that follow.
Vertical alignment
To answer how well the curriculum is vertically aligned across grade levels, the study examined
whether or not the texts for reading listed in the district pacing guides for each grade reflect a
reasonable increase in difficulty over the previous grade, as reflected by a readability score. The
review also considers the degree to which the district curriculum differentiates what students
should learn at each grade level.
The review for vertical alignment of text difficulty across grades was determined by evaluating
one of three aspects articulated by the Common Core State Standards as important to
determining the complexity of texts. The review of quantitative readability measures indicates
that, in most grades, the texts that students read are more difficult than the texts read by students
in the prior grade and less difficult than the texts that students read in the next grade. However,
there are some exceptions. Several grades have higher readability levels (grades 4, 6, and 11)
than the surrounding grades because they tended to include high scoring expository nonfiction.
Although the vertical alignment of text difficulty isn’t a steady increase from every grade to the
next, the general trend across grades K–12 is for increasingly difficult text.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
5
Overall, reading skills are differentiated from grade to grade primarily by the Nebraska
standards, but also by the OPS curriculum. Nearly half of the indicators in the Nebraska reading
standard describe skills that are different from the indicators in the prior grade level, while fewer
are differentiated by the OPS curriculum. There are some indicators at every grade level that are
the same as the prior grade level.
Gaps and Overlaps
To address whether or not there are content gaps and overlaps in the curriculum, district
curriculum was reviewed to determine whether or not all the indicators in the Nebraska Reading
Standards are cited. Indicators not found in the curriculum are considered gaps in that not all
content in the Nebraska standards is also found in the Omaha curriculum.
All indicators for grades K–2 are addressed in the OPS curriculum documents. Very few
indicators are not addressed in grades 3–5, and all indicators are addressed in grade 6. A few
indicators for Comprehension, Vocabulary, and Fluency were not found in the pacing guides for
grade 7 and additional gaps are found in those areas for grade 8. These indicators, which are
identified in Appendix B, should be incorporated into the pacing guides to ensure that all content
present in the Nebraska standards is also found in the OPS curriculum.
In addition, the curriculum was reviewed for content overlaps. In particular, instances when the
same reading text is listed more than once within or across grades. More than a dozen titles were
identified that are listed in the pacing guides at more than one grade. Several of these titles
appear in both grades 2 and 3. Because the basal reading program changes between grade 2 and
grade 3, the materials and lessons in these programs should be more closely compared to ensure
that there are no other overlaps. There were also a number of titles identified that appear more
than once at the same grade level. Almost all of these duplicate titles appear in the high school
grades. While some of this overlap within the same grade may be sharing of resources across
classrooms, the pacing guides should make clear to teachers when titles have been listed more
than once for this reason. High school courses should be reviewed for whether they include
duplicate text titles and assurances put in place that a student will not be asked to read the same
text in more than one class. Ideally, titles should be identified as an option for student reading for
only one quarter or unit within the course.
Rigor
To determine whether or not the district curriculum addresses the appropriate level of rigor,
analysts compared the median Lexile® reading level of texts listed in the pacing guides for each
grade band with the expectations for each grade band developed by Lexile® and the Common
Core State Standards. Such readability formulas are one of three components identified by the
Common Core State Standards to measure the complexity of texts.
The median level of difficulty of texts listed in the OPS pacing guides is very closely aligned
with target levels used by readability systems prior to upward adjustments made in response to
the Common Core. At all grade levels, the median score of texts in the OPS curriculum falls
short of the levels defined by the Common Core State Standards. The curriculum documents in
the secondary grades especially should be reviewed to evaluate areas where texts with high
readability scores might be added. Also, texts in the curriculum that may not be challenging to
students should be considered for deletion.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
6
Curriculum areas worthy of praise
The other overarching question guiding the study asks about areas of the curriculum identified
during the review that are effective and closely aligned with the content and rigor of the
Nebraska standards:
What areas of curriculum are worthy of praise?
Analysts made note of areas worthy of praise during their review of the curriculum and
evaluation of information gathered. A number of areas for which the district curriculum
successfully aligns with the Nebraska standards were identified.
Breadth of texts
The pacing guides for grades 7–12 provide many suggested titles; this generous resource should
provide teachers many useful options when selecting texts in order to meet the specific needs and
interests of their students. Although there are not as many options for texts listed at the
elementary grades, there are leveled readers available for students at different reading levels; this
resource will also allow teachers to select materials that suit their students. Also in support of
differentiating material to serve instruction, the pacing guides in grades 7 and 8 identify, with an
asterisk, those selections that have a higher reading level. This information is important to
teachers who are selecting advanced texts for particular students or classes.
The texts listed in the district pacing guides also represent a wide variety of genres and cultures.
American Indian, Latino, and African works are noted, in addition to traditional titles in the
canon of English literature.
In the elementary grades, the pacing guides include paired texts for the primary text selections,
which allow teachers to ask students higher order comparison and synthesis questions. The
Common Core State Standards emphasize building knowledge on topics and texts by comparing
multiple texts.
Instructional supports
The pacing guides provide a variety of useful supports to help teachers implement and
understand the focus of curricular units and resources. Among the useful resources in the
secondary grades are essential questions and themes that organize the literature into coherent
units of study. For the elementary grades, teachers are provided guidance on when to focus on
particular comprehension skills and the reading strategies that students should learn to apply.
Such elements in the pacing guides are useful supports for teachers.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
7
3. VERTICAL ALIGNMENT
One of the specific questions posed in the study is the degree to which the Omaha curriculum is
aligned across grade levels. To answer how well the curriculum is aligned across grade levels,
the study examined whether or not the texts for reading at each grade reflect a reasonable
increase in difficulty over the previous grade, as reflected by a readability score. The reading
knowledge and skills identified from the Nebraska standards that are cited in the curriculum were
also reviewed for whether or not they delineate the specific skills that students should master at
each grade level.
Text difficulty across grades
Critical to vertical alignment in reading is whether or not the difficulty of the texts that students
read increases from grade to grade, building students’ ability to comprehend more difficult texts
each year until the time they graduate. To answer how well the curriculum is vertically aligned
across grade levels, the study examined whether or not the texts for reading listed in the district
pacing guides for each grade reflect a reasonable increase in difficulty over the previous grade,
as reflected by their readability score. Readability scores use quantifiable information about a
text to gauge the relative difficulty of reading material or to assess an individual’s reading
ability.
For this study, analysts used the Lexile® Framework for Reading developed by MetaMetrics as
the readability measure. Lexile® measures evaluate the variables of word frequency and sentence
length. Lexile® measures are expressed as numeric measures followed by an “L” (for example,
650L), which are then placed on the Lexile® scale for measuring reader ability and text
complexity (ranging from below 200L to above 1600L).
Analysts recorded all the primary and paired selections identified in the pacing guides for each
grade and the supplementary books list for secondary grades, and then searched for each text’s
Lexile® level using an online public database (MetaMetrics, 2013). Lexile® levels for paired
selections were not as commonly available as Lexile® levels for the primary selections, so the
results reflect the primary selections more heavily than texts used to supplement and pair with
the primary texts that students read. We did not review texts listed as options for small group
guided reading instruction in the elementary grades because these texts are matched to
individual student reading levels and not intended for use with all students.
The Lexile® level for some texts could not be identified. Non-prose texts, such as poetry and
drama, cannot be accurately evaluated for a readability score and so were not included. At times,
the author or version of the text listed in the pacing guides was not clear, and so these texts were
not included in the study of Lexile®. For example, there are many versions and translations of
folktales and myths, which may vary widely in their Lexile® level. If the particular version
referenced in the pacing guides could not be determined, the information for these texts was not
included in the review for Lexile®. Finally, the Lexile® level for some titles could not be found.
It is important to remember that readability levels, which measure word and sentence frequency
and lengths, are only one aspect that may make a text difficult. The topics addressed in the work,
the depth of the content, and the sophistication of the text’s presentation are aspects that are not
captured in readability scores.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
8
The kindergarten pacing guide lists books used in read-alouds. These texts were evaluated for
Lexile® levels and averaged a higher level than texts meant for student to read. Using more
difficult texts than students are able to read themselves for lessons in which the teacher reads
aloud to students is a key recommendation made by the Publisher’s Criteria for the Common
Core State Standards (Coleman, D. & Pimentel, S., 2012). The Nebraska curriculum meets this
recommendation by exposing children to challenging vocabulary and content area knowledge
through the use of complex texts during read-alouds. The average Lexile level for texts that
students read in kindergarten in the pacing guides is 382L, while the average score for texts read
aloud to students is 527L. The scores for read-aloud texts in kindergarten are not included in the
totals in Figure 6.1 because read-aloud texts are not meant to reflect the reading level of students;
rather, they are meant for adults to read to children. Also, read aloud texts are provided in the
pacing guides for kindergarten only. Figure 3.1 shows the mean Lexile® levels of texts listed in
the pacing guides for each grade level.
Figure 3.1 Average Lexile® Levels of Texts Listed in Pacing Guides
986
889
773
745
853
880
917
975
792
619
463
511
382
The Lexile® levels build steadily and quickly from kindergarten to grade 3; there is a significant
jump in grade 4 and then growth slows somewhat.
Several of the grades have higher levels than the grades before and after, specifically grades 4, 6,
and 11. This may be attributed to the fact that these grades include some informational texts with
notably high readability levels. Grade 6 has some high scoring expository nonfiction. Grade 11 is
focused on American literature, including numerous 19th century primary documents. In contrast,
grade 12 has numerous translated world literature works, which may account for its slightly
lower average reading level when compared to grade 11.
The general trend across all grades is for increasingly difficult text. There are some dips and
jumps where the vertical alignment is not steady, but overall the difficulty of texts increases as
students advance. It should be noted that the readability of a text does not account for all factors
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
9
that may be important for determining the overall difficulty of a text. The topic and associated
activity for the text are also important factors when determining whether a particular work is
age-appropriate, challenging, and central to students’ content area knowledge.
The texts read in most grades increase in difficulty over the previous grade, though growth is
slower after grade 4 and there are grades that do not increase in difficulty. To ensure that
students remain challenged in every grade, more complex texts should be included in middle and
high school. For more discussion of the level of complexity in these grades, see section 6 of this
report on Rigor.
Identifying target student knowledge and skills
The review for vertical alignment also considered the degree to which the district curriculum
differentiates the specific knowledge and skills that students should learn at each grade level.
When a curriculum clearly identifies the learning goals that students should attain at each grade,
it communicates how students’ reading skills should progress over time.
Analysts reviewed the indicators in the Nebraska reading standard and determined whether or
not the indicators describe unique content when compared to the prior grade level. Many
indicators in the Nebraska standards across grades focus on the same basic skill, but describe the
skill in increasingly sophisticated or detailed ways. If an indicator was identical to an indicator in
the prior grade level, analysts reviewed any additions and details added to the indictor in the OPS
curriculum to determine whether they provide grade-specific goals for student learning in the
grade of focus. Figure 3.2 (next page) provides the results of this evaluation, showing, by grade,
what number of indicators are differentiated from the previous grade either as a result of
specifics in the Nebraska standards, or through specifics provided in the OPS curriculum.
Overall, reading skills are differentiated from grade to grade primarily by the Nebraska
standards, but also by the OPS curriculum. A majority of indicators are differentiated from
indicators that address the same skills in the prior grade. The majority of these differentiated
indicators are distinct in the Nebraska reading standard; fewer are differentiated by the OPS
curriculum. There are some indicators at every grade level that are the same as the prior grade
level.
Note that there are many more indicators in grade 1 than in other grades because grade 1
includes content for the early reading skills of Knowledge of Print and Phonological Awareness,
which are not addressed in later grades.
Many reading skills require continual practice across several grade levels, with increasingly
difficult texts providing a challenge as students advance. However, to the extent that a
curriculum can identify specific learning goals for students at each grade level, it will provide
greater clarity to educators, parents, and students about grade level expectations for reading.
Consider, for example, the following indicator from the Nebraska standards which is identical in
both grades 7 and 8:
LA.7–8.6.e: Apply knowledge of organizational patterns found in informational
text (e.g., sequence, description, cause and effect, compare/contrast, fact/opinion,
proposition/support)
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
10
Figure 3.2 Differentiation of Reading Indicators When Compared to Previous Grade Level
Grade 12
Grade 8
Grade 7
Grade 6
Grade 5
Grade 4
Grade 3
Grade 2
Grade 1
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Indicators Differentiated by NE Standards
Indicators Differentiated by OPS
Indicators Not Differentiated
The OPS curriculum doesn’t identify which organizational patterns student will study during the
school year to meet this standard, and so it is possible that students will repeatedly learn about
one particular pattern, while not leaning about others. While it may be appropriate for students to
read texts with the same organizational pattern in both grade 7 and grade 8, the curriculum
should provide enough specificity about which patterns are addressed to ensure that students
have opportunity to learn about a variety of patterns during grades 7 and 8.
Summary of findings
The review for vertical alignment of text difficulty across grades was determined by evaluating
one of three aspects articulated by the Common Core State Standards as important to
determining the complexity of texts. The review of quantitative readability measures indicates
that, in most grades, the texts that students read are more difficult than the texts read by students
in the prior grade and less difficult than the texts that students read in the next grade. However,
there are some exceptions. Several grades have notably higher readability levels (grades 4, 6, and
11) than the surrounding grades because they tended to include high scoring expository
nonfiction. Although the vertical alignment of text difficulty isn’t a steady increase from every
grade to the next, the general trend across grades K–12 is for increasingly difficult text.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
11
Overall, reading skills are differentiated from grade to grade primarily by the Nebraska
standards, but also by the OPS curriculum. Nearly half of the indicators in the Nebraska reading
standard describe skills that are different from the indicators in the prior grade level, while fewer
are differentiated by the OPS curriculum. There are some indicators at every grade level that are
the same as the prior grade level.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
12
4. GAPS AND OVERLAPS
A key aspect of the alignment study is whether or not any gaps or overlaps exist within the
curriculum. The curriculum materials were reviewed to determine whether or not all the
indicators in the Nebraska Reading Standard are cited. Indicators not found in the curriculum are
considered gaps in that not all content in the Nebraska standards is also found in the Omaha
curriculum.
In addition, the curriculum was reviewed for overlaps, or instances in which a text for student
reading is listed in the pacing guides in more than one quarter of the same grade, or instances in
which the same text is listed at more than one grade level. Analysts entered all texts cited in the
pacing guides into a spreadsheet and sorted them to identify titles that were identical. The genre
and other information associated with each of the duplicate titles was reviewed to ensure that the
text was identical.
Gaps
Complete coverage of the content in the Nebraska Standards is necessary to ensure that students
have opportunity to learn all of the knowledge and skills deemed important in the state standards.
If the curriculum documents do not include all indicators in the Nebraska Standards, students
may miss important content that they need to successfully meet expectations in the next grade,
and eventually for success in college or the workplace. The curriculum materials were reviewed
to determine whether or not all the indicators in the Nebraska Reading Standard are cited. To
identify any gaps, analysts noted all of the Nebraska indicators that were listed in curriculum
documents.
Grades 9–12
The pacing guides for 9–12 were not evaluated for gaps. The Nebraska standards articulate
expectations for high school as a single grade band 9–12, rather than expectations for each grade,
as they do for kindergarten thru 8th grade. The OPS curriculum notes the importance of
addressing these standards, but does not pace the indicators across the year. Rather, the notes
indicate that the teacher’s choice of literature should drive the selection of which standards and
indicator are appropriate. Each of the course pacing guides includes the following statement,
which only varies in the course title:
“It is up to teachers to determine what critical skills best fit with the literature for each
unit, but it is expected that all critical skills for English 1–2 be taught. These skills are
identified in the Nebraska Language Arts Standards and are expected to be incorporated
in the curriculum in all of the required arts courses.”
While this statement appears in every high school course, the pacing guides for English 5–6
(grade 10) and English 7–8 (grade 11) also list the Nebraska standards at a general level and
associate them with a general target for the year (grades 9 and 12 do not), but the indicators are
not paced through the school year or associated with particular reading texts or lessons.
Since indicators for grades 9–12 from the Nebraska reading standard are not aligned to particular
texts or quarters in the curriculum for high school, there is no assurance that students will have
the opportunity to learn every skill identified by the state as important during their high school
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
13
language arts education. Although the pacing guides provide flexibility to teachers when
selecting reading material, the Nebraska indicators for reading are general enough that most of
them could be applied to most texts. The curriculum would benefit if particular indicators were
identified as the primary emphasis for each quarter, so that teachers would share a common focus
on specific reading skills during each grading period and systematically ensure that all indicators
are addressed during the course of the school year.
Grades K–8
For each of the major reading topics Figure 4.1 identifies the number and type of Nebraska
reading indicators that are not addressed in curriculum documents. Appendix B identifies the
specific reading indicators in the Nebraska standards at each grade that are not found listed in the
Omaha curriculum documents.
Figure 4.1 Percent of Reading Indicators Addressed and Not Addressed in the OPS
Curriculum
Grade 8
Grade 7
Grade 6
Grade 5
Grade 4
Grade 3
Grade 2
Grade 1
Kindergarten
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Not addressed: Word Analysis
Not addressed: Fluency
Not addressed: Vocabulary
Not addressed: Comprehension
Overall, most of the indicators in the Nebraska standards are addressed by OPS curriculum
documents; however, slightly more than half of the indicators in grade 8 were not addressed.
These gaps were primarily in the areas of Comprehension and Vocabulary. There are a few
indicators for Comprehension, Vocabulary, and Fluency not found in the curriculum for grade 7.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
14
Although the OPS curriculum addresses all of the reading indicators for grades K–2, the bulk of
indicators within the concepts of Knowledge of Print (1.1) and Phonological Awareness (1.2) are
addressed only within the First 20 Days of Literacy documents; additional time spent on these
indicators is determined by the results of formative assessment, specifically the OPS K–2 reading
assessment.
For grades K thru 6, nearly all of the Nebraska indicators within Word Analysis (1.4),
Vocabulary (1.5), and Comprehension (1.6) are addressed in the reading pacing guide documents
associated with the reading programs used in each grade band (Journeys for grades K–2;
StoryTown for grades 3–6). Nearly all the indicators organized under all six concepts are
addressed in the other pacing guides used in grades K thru 6, that is, the comprehensive pacing
guides that address all strands of the language arts (for a fuller description of the pacing guide
documents used in the review, see Appendix A).
Appendix B identifies all indicators in the Nebraska standards for each grade that are not also
found listed in the Omaha curriculum. Overall, the number of indicators not addressed in the
curriculum is not a significant percentage of all indicators in each grade. There is an average of
27 indicators in each grade for reading; only one reading indicator is not addressed in each grade
3–5; the largest number of reading indicators not addressed is in grade 8, where 12 of 23 reading
indicators for the grade level are not addressed.
Overlaps
The curriculum was also reviewed for overlaps. Many reading skills are continually practiced, as
students apply them to increasingly difficult text, but overlapping texts, such as instances when a
particular text is taught more than once, may pose unintended repetition in the curriculum. Some
repetition of texts is likely warranted. For example, close reading of texts and using texts as
references during a task may require reading the same material more than once. However, such
repetition should be thoughtfully included to purposefully help a student build a particular
knowledge or skill, rather than repeated unnecessarily. Teaching with a particular text in more in
more than one grade without a different focus or depth does not challenge students or broaden
their knowledge of subjects and topics. Table 4.2 identifies texts that are listed in the pacing
guides in more than one grade.
Table 4.2. Same Title in Different Grades
Grade
7 11 2 3 9 12 9 11 8 11 Title of Text
Barrio Boy “Half‐ Chicken” “Harrison Bergeron” “I Have a Dream” I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
Genre
excerpt from novel novel folktale excerpt from story short story speech excerpt from novel novel 15
Grade
11 12 2 3 2 3 1 2 8 9 7 11 K 2 5 7 10 8 10 K 1 Title of Text
Genre
Night excerpt from novella novella “Schools Around the World” informational article Stone Soup folktale “Storms” informational article “Thank You, Ma'am” short story The Joy Luck Club excerpt from novel novel “The Lion and the Mouse” fable The Outsiders “The Story Teller” “The Three Little Pigs” novel short story fairy Tale Note that in the Table 4.2 above, several of the titles overlap across grades 2 and 3. The basal
reading program Journeys is used in grades K–2, but the program Story Town is used in grades
3–6. This change in program may account for some of the overlap in texts between grades 2 and
3 as particular titles are included in both reading programs, but at different grades.
In one instance, a particular fable, “The Lion and the Mouse” is listed for three different grades
levels. These are likely different versions of the same story so that the difficulty of the text is
appropriate for each grade; however, the essential characters and plot of the story are the same. It
is recommended that students do not read the same fable in more than one grade because it
doesn’t advance the breadth of their reading or knowledge of the world.
Table 4.3 below identifies titles that were listed in the pacing guides in more than one lesson or
quarter within the same grade.
Table 4.3. Same Title in the Same Grade
Grade
Listed in Pacing Guide
Title of Text
Genre
3 Lesson 22 Lesson 27 “Bat Loves the Night” informational narrative 11 Quarter 2 Quarter 4 Black Boy novel Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
16
Grade
Listed in Pacing Guide
9 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 1 Quarter 4 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 Quarter 1 Quarter 3 Quarter 2 11 11 9 9 11 11 10 11 9 11 9 12 11 Title of Text
Genre
“Dog Star” short story “Fall of the House of Usher” short story “Gettysburg Address” speech “Helen on Eighty‐Sixth Street” short story “Marigolds” short story Moby Dick novel short story Quarter 3 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 2 Quarter 4 Quarter 1 Quarter 3 Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 2 [novel excerpt]
My People the Sioux novel Mythology novel “Rules of the Game” short story Speak novel “Speaking of Courage” short story “The Osage Orange Tree” short story The Other novel Walden [novel excerpt]
short story Quarter 3 novel Nearly all of the titles listed more than once in the same grade appear in high school courses.
There are many more titles listed in the pacing guides for these grades than could be covered in
the school year, so teachers will select the texts they want students to read from this list. The
overlap within a single grade level may be necessary if there are only enough copies for one
class to use at a time, necessitating classes to take turns using the set of books at different times
during the school year, or similar logistical issues. However, this overlap might result in students
reading a particular title twice if they were to transfer classes, as well as making the intended
progression and pacing of the curriculum less clear to teachers.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
17
Summary of Findings
All indicators for grades K–2 are addressed in the OPS curriculum documents. Very few
indicators are not addressed in grades 3–6. A few indicators for Comprehension, Vocabulary,
and Fluency were not found in the curriculum for grade 7 and additional gaps are found in those
areas for grade 8. These indicators, which are identified in Appendix B, should be incorporated
into the pacing guides to ensure that all content present in the Nebraska standards is also found in
the OPS curriculum.
In regards to overlapping content, more than a dozen titles were identified that are listed in the
pacing guides at more than one grade. Several of these titles appear in both grades 2 and 3.
Similarly, a switch in textbook publishers between grade 8 and 9 results in the overlap of the
short story “Thank You, Ma’am.” Because of these program changes between grades, the
materials and lessons in these programs should be more closely compared to ensure that there are
no other overlaps and that expectations for students build smoothly across these grades.
There were also a number of titles identified that appear more than once at the same high school
grade level. While some of this overlap within the same grade may be sharing of resources
across classrooms, the pacing guides should make clear to teachers when titles have been listed
more than once for this reason. High school courses should be reviewed for whether they include
duplicate text titles and assurances put in place that a student will not be asked to read the same
text in more than one class. Ideally titles should be identified as an option for student reading for
only one quarter or unit within the course.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
18
5. RIGOR
The final specific question posed in the study is whether or not the curriculum demonstrates an
appropriate level of rigor. To evaluate rigor, analysts compared the median readability level of
texts in the OPS pacing guides and the Supplementary Book list to the grade band expectations
for text difficulty identified by MetaMetrics and the Common Core. Difficulty of texts
MetaMetrics’ Lexile® Framework for Reading, used to evaluate text difficult in the study’s
review for vertical alignment, was again used to help answer the question about the rigor of the
curriculum. Please see the Vertical Alignment Section of this report for more information about
how the Lexile® levels for texts in the OPS curriculum documents were determined.
The median Lexile® level of texts listed in the pacing guides for each grade band are compared to
Lexile® expectations from MetaMetrics and the Common Core. These organizations define a
range of Lexile® scores for grade bands, and so the median level of the range for each band to
compare to the median level of the texts in the OPS curriculum for the same grade band.
Lexile® levels, like numerous other readability scores, may be used to gauge the relative
difficulty of reading material or to assess an individual’s reading ability. In 2010 the Common
Core State Standards were published; these standards called for an increase in the difficulty of
texts and recommended upward adjustment to the Lexile® levels associated with each grade
band. A study was conducted to compare and align a variety of readability systems to the college
and career ready levels called for in the Common Core (Nelson, et. al., 2012). The readability
systems included in the review were:
ATOS by Renaissance Learning
Degrees of Reading Power® (DRP®) by Questar Assessment, Inc.
Flesch-Kincaid (public domain)
The Lexile® Framework for Reading by MetaMetrics
Reading Maturity by Pearson Education
SourceRater by Educational Testing Service
Easability Indicator by Coh-Metrix
The Lexile® Framework was one of the systems reviewed in the Nelson study, and as a result of
this study and the widespread adoption of the Common Core, MetaMetrics changed the Lexile®
levels associated with each grade band, revising them upward. (After the Nelson study, many
organizations adjusted their readability score ranges.) Many textbooks and basal reading
programs, such as those used in the elementary grades in OPS, include texts that are based on
readability scores, so any programs developed prior to the Common Core will contain texts for
each grade based on the previously defined levels. For this review of the OPS reading
curriculum, the Lexile® levels used for each grade band prior to 2012 and the Lexile® levels
recommended for each grade band by the Common Core and the Nelson study were both
compared to the median Lexile® level of texts listed in OPS curriculum documents for the same
grade band. These comparisons are shown in Figure 5.1.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
19
Figure 5.1 Lexile® Levels Comparison
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Grades 2‐3
Grades 4‐5
Common Core
Grades 6‐8
Old Lexile® Levels*
Grades 9‐10
Grades 11‐CCR
OPS Pacing Guide
*Lexile levels prior to the Common Core
As shown in the graph above, the median level of difficulty of texts listed in the OPS pacing
guides is very closely aligned with levels defined by MetaMetrics prior to the Common Core.
This close alignment in grades 2–6 likely reflects the fact that the reading programs used in
elementary grades in OPS are based on readability ranges defined prior to the adjustments made
after the advent of the Common Core and the Nelson study (2012). In middle school, the levels
between OPS ranges and Lexile® levels start to diverge. In high school, the Lexile® levels of texts
used in OPS rise at similar rate as the Lexile® levels defined by MetaMetrics both before and
after Common Core adjustments were made, but they fail to make up the difference that began in
elementary and middle school.
It is important to remember that readability levels, which measure word and sentence frequency
and lengths, are only one aspect that may make a text difficult. The topics addressed in the work,
the depth of the content, and the sophistication of the text’s presentation are aspects that are not
captured in readability scores. In the Common Core State Standards, readability measures are
one of three aspects important to determining the difficulty of text. The other aspects, qualitative
measures and reader and task considerations, are largely subjective and dependent on the
particular context of a given classroom and individual student background knowledge. Thus
these elements were outside the scope of this review, but remain important considerations for
schools and teachers in the district. Also, not all texts were included in the review. For example,
drama cannot be evaluated with readability scores, so the plays of Shakespeare, which would
likely be considered difficult by many standards, are not included in the data.
It is also important to remember that the level of texts listed in the OPS pacing guides and
supplemental reading lists are part of the curriculum. They do not describe the reading level or
ability of students in the OPS school system.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
20
To ensure that the texts student engage with texts with average difficulty levels on par with
national expectations, the texts used in the OPS curriculum documents should be reviewed to
evaluate areas where texts with high readability scores might be added. Also, texts in the
curriculum that may not be challenging to students should be considered for deletion. The
specific data collected by McREL, including text titles and their corresponding Lexile® levels,
are available to the district upon request.
Summary of Findings
The median level of difficulty of texts listed in the OPS pacing guides for elementary school are
very closely aligned with target levels used by readability systems prior to upward adjustments
made in response to the Common Core. The median level of texts in the OPS curriculum begins
to fall behind the expectations of readability systems during middle school. During high school,
the texts in the OPS curriculum rise at a similar rate as the levels defined by readability systems;
however, the average level of texts used in OPS fail to make up the differences that began in
earlier grades. At all grade levels, the median score of texts in the OPS curriculum fall short of
the levels defined by the Common Core State Standards for complex texts. The curriculum
documents in the secondary grades should be reviewed to evaluate areas where texts with high
readability scores might be added. Also, texts in the curriculum that may not be challenging to
students should be considered for deletion.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
21
REFERENCES
Coleman, D., & Pimentel, S. (May 16, 2012). Revised publisher’s criteria for the common core
state standards in English language arts and literacy, grades K–2. Retrieved from
www.corestandards.org/assets/Publishers_Criteria_for_K-2.pdf
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for English
language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects.
Washington, DC: CCSSO & National Governors Association. Retrieved from
http://www.corestandards.org/the‐standards
MetaMetrics. (2013). Lexile® Framework for Reading [Quick Search online database].
http://www.lexile.com/
Nelson, J., Perfetti, C., Liben, D. & Liben, M. (2012). Measures of text difficulty: Testing their
predictive value for grade levels and student performance. Council of Chief State School
Officers. Retrieved from
http://www.ccsso.org/Resources/Digital_Resources/The_Common_Core_State_Standards_
Supporting_Districts_and_Teachers_with_Text_Complexity.html
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
22
APPENDIX A
Table A.1 Reading Pacing Guides for Grades K-6
Documents Description of Elements
Reading  Pacing provided by units/dates and further by thematic lessons.
Pacing Guides  NE reading standards and texts aligned to “Target/Focus Skills,” “Target
Strategies,” and “Vocabulary.”
 Uses the Journeys program for K-2 and StoryTown for grade 3-6.
 Texts identified for small reading groups and read alouds.
 Texts identified as supplemental selections to be paired with a primary text.
 Includes alignment to OPS Reading strategies and Omaha specific curriculum
expectations (additions) to the NE standards.
Complete  Provides pacing information and focus standards for each quarter, including
communication content across the language arts: reading, writing, oral
Pacing communication, and multiple literacies.
Guides  Includes vocabulary words for specific units.
 Includes Sitton spelling words.
At‐A‐Glace  Shows the focus for each quarter (including the units of study in the books) and
writing focus.
Pacing Guide
 Provides a broad level overview of reading and writing programs, including guided
reading using leveled books, focused instruction in small groups, conferences, and
paired reading.
First 20 Days  Lists the Nebraska reading indicators for grades K–2 that are addressed each day.
with State  Lists the days that each Nebraska grade level standard for K–2 is addressed within
Standards the lessons planned for the first 20 days of school.
Scope and  Provides an overview of each unit of study in the Journey’s reading program for
grades K–2.
Sequence for Journeys  Identifies the early reading skills, sight words, vocabulary, and reading selections
that are addressed in each unit.
 Supplementary document and spreadsheet that identify the scope and sequence of
phonological awareness skills within the Journeys program for each week throughout
the year in grades K–2.
Reading  OPS assessment booklet used with students in grades K–2
Assessment  Targets early reading skills, including letter recognition, phonological awareness, and
Book, knowledge of print, word analysis, vocabulary, and phonics.
Teacher’s  Provides teachers with diagnostic and formative data on individual student’s reading
ability to support differentiation and targeted instruction.
Edition Table A.2 Reading Pacing Guides for Grades 7-8
Description of Elements
Documents
Comprehensive  Provides pacing information by quarter, including:
PacingGuide
o academic vocabulary;
o grammar, word parts;
o titles of novels, short stories, non-fiction, poems, and drama;
o aligned standards and related skill;
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
23
The 
Supplementary Books for English 
and Language Arts Classes, 2013–2014
o thematic concepts, enduring understandings, guiding questions.
Identifies reading material that has been approved for use in the district for each
grade, 7–12.
provides Lexile® levels for most titles.
Table A.3 Reading Pacing Guides for Grades 9-12
Documents
English 1 - 2
English 3 – 4
English 5 – 6
English 7 – 8
The
Supplementary
Books for
English and
Language Arts
Classes, 2013–
2014
Description of Elements
 Provides overview of the course.
 Organizes content into 4 units/quarters, each including:
o suggested unit resources (titles), enduring understandings, guiding questions;
o learning experiences (lesson), including handouts;
o a list of short activity ideas for each quarter.
 Provides overview of the course.
 Organizes content into 4 units/quarters, each including:
o a list of the Nebraska state standards for K–12;
o suggested unit resources (titles), enduring understandings, guiding questions;
o learning experiences (lesson), including handouts;
o list of short activity ideas for each quarter.
 Provides overview of the course.
 Organizes content into 4 units/quarters, each including:
o a list of the Nebraska state standards for K–12;
o suggested unit resources (titles), enduring understandings, guiding questions;
o learning experiences (lesson), including handouts and rubrics;
o list of short activity ideas for each quarter.
 Provides overview of the course.
 Organizes content into 4 units/quarters, each including:
o suggested unit resources (titles), enduring understandings, guiding questions.
 Identifies reading material that has been approved for use in the district for each
grade, 7–12.
 provides Lexile® levels for most titles.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
24
APPENDIX B
Table B.1 Nebraska Indicators not found in OPS Curriculum
Code
Indicator
Grade 3
3.1.3.b
Use word structure to read text (e.g., prefixes/suffixes, compound words,
contractions, syllabication, derivation)
Grade 4
4.1.3.b
Use word structure to read text (e.g., prefixes/suffixes, compound words,
contractions, syllabication, derivation)
Grade 5
5.1.4.c
Recognize and practice elements of oral prosodic reading to reflect meaning of
text (e.g., poem read slowly, conversational narrative, emphasis on key points
of information)
Grade 7
7.1.4.a
Apply elements of prosodic reading to a group of related texts and explore their
potential for performance
7.1.4.b
Adjust oral or silent reading pace based on purpose, text difficulty, form, and
style
7.1.5.e
Determine meaning using print and digital reference materials
7.1.6.i
Use narrative and informational text to develop a national and global multicultural perspective
7.1.6.o
Respond to text verbally, in writing, or artistically
Grade 8
8.1.4.a
Incorporate elements of prosodic reading to communicate text
8.1.4.b
Adjust oral or silent reading pace based on purpose, text difficulty, form, and
style
8.1.5.a
Determine meaning of words through structural analysis, using knowledge of
Greek, Latin, and Anglo-Saxon roots, prefixes, and suffixes to understand
complex words, including words in science, mathematics, and social studies
8.1.5.b
Relate new grade level vocabulary to prior knowledge and use in new
situations.
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
25
Code
Indicator
8.1.5.c
Select a context clue strategy to determine meaning of unknown words
appropriate to text (e.g., restatement, example, gloss, annotation, sidebar)
8.1.5.d
Analyze semantic relationships (e.g., figurative language, connotations, subtle
distinctions)
8.1.5.e
Determine meaning using print and digital reference materials
8.1.6.f
Analyze and evaluate information from text features (e.g., index, annotations,
maps, charts, tables, graphs, headings, subheadings, lists)
8.1.6.i
Use narrative and informational text to develop a national and global multicultural perspective
8.1.6.l
Build and activate prior knowledge in order to clarify text, deepen
understanding, and make connections while reading
8.1.6.m
Self-monitor comprehension for accuracy and understanding when errors
detract from meaning by applying appropriate strategies to self-correct
8.1.6.o
Respond to text verbally, in writing, or artistically
Omaha Public Schools Curriculum Review for Reading, Grades K–12
26