Imagine entering a classroom where some students are working in small groups, others in partnerships, and some independently. There is a low but lively hum of students’ voices. Perhaps they are making plans for how to show their learning to the rest of their classroom community. Some might be negotiating the meaning of a text. Maybe they are conferring with another student about a learning goal. As all of this is happening, the teacher is moving freely through the classroom, keenly aware of how the space is functioning. Classroom supplies, tools, and charts are thoughtfully set up to provide easy access to all learners. The library is central to the function of the room and is reflective of students’ identities and interests. This classroom is a classroom built for agency.
Agency is one of those ubiquitous terms in education. It seems to be everywhere, it is part of every presentation, and yet, when pressed to define it, its meaning is somewhat elusive. In Peter Johnston’s seminal book, Choice Words, he defined agency as, “Children should leave school with a sense that if they act, and act strategically, they can accomplish their goals. I call this feeling a sense of agency.”
Johnston’s book, Choice Words, lent legitimacy to the authentic approaches to teaching and learning we believe in. Having a sense of agency holds the promise to empower all to learn with a sense of agency because our work matters, and everyone has the potential to make a positive impact. We believe agency makes it possible for learning to be joyful and celebrated by everyone in the learning community. In our book, WIRE for Agency Four Simple Moves that Transfer Learning, we expanded on Johnston’s definition: “Agency is a belief system that says your actions can and will make an impact. Students who exhibit agency feel valued; they operate with choice and a sense of freedom. They keep learning and trying to achieve because they have conviction that their work matters.”
Access, Language, and Choice: Three Core Beliefs to Sustain Agency
There are three core beliefs that sustain and nurture agency in the classroom. Giving access, careful deliberation for language, and offering choice are common beliefs shared by many teachers. However, these beliefs become even more powerful when used as a lens for agency:
Access: Students get what is needed (independence, additional support, and time) to think.
Language: Teachers use language as a vehicle to foster safety, empathy, equity, and trust.
Choice: Students are given a choice to decide content, planning, strategy, and people to work with.
Realizing agency for teachers and students may be only one or two small tweaks away. One possible way to focus this work is to reflect on one aspect of the classroom environment. Let’s use the classroom library as an example:
Access: Determine if the reading materials in the library are reflective of the students in the class. Some questions to evaluate access might be: “Do the text bands match the reading readiness of the students in this classroom?” “Do the books match their reading identities in terms of culture or interests?”
Language: Determine if there is evidence of student voice within the library. Some questions to ask students might be: “Do the categories of the bins make sense to you?” “How can a person find a book they are able to read by themselves?” “What is the best part of the library? Why?” “How do you select a book for your book bin?” “How can the library be improved?”
Choice: Determine if the classroom library is open-ended for student participation. Managing the library and book selection has traditionally been under the purview of the teacher. If you give students some choice for book selection, this small library becomes an important step towards agency. Giving students some choice for how the space will be used and managed is another step toward agency. Some questions to ask might be: “Is there evidence of student choice to influence in the classroom library?” If yes, “What is it?” If no, “What can be shifted to include more choice?”
For the purpose of this post, we used the classroom library as an example, but there are many aspects of the classroom environment that can be a mediator for agency. Here is a checklist that might be a useful tool to start this work.
Closing Thoughts
An agentive classroom does not have to be an imaginary place. Many classrooms already have a lot of what it takes to grant access to agency for learning. If you are tired of students asking for supplies, then try moving supplies where they can be readily accessed. If you are tired of students asking for clarifying directions, try using an anchor chart that students help to create using language they understand. If you are tired of students saying, “I’m done.” try giving them choice for what to do next. These small but significant tweaks will make your teaching and their learning even more meaningful if you give it a go. When we teach students to think flexibly about their classroom environment, it is but a stepping stone for them to challenge other “fixed” spaces in society. Life-long learners who are critical thinkers are who is needed for a better tomorrow. So start teaching for a sense of agency today.
There are certain days when February 2020 seems like it was yesterday, but others where it seems to be a lifetime ago. Looking back is a surreal experience. Effective August 1st, I had been appointed to begin as Superintendent of Schools in North Rockland, a diverse district 35 miles north of Manhattan. I was excited to be attending my first New York State Superintendent’s conference in Albany, NY. I was experiencing feelings of excitement and nerves as my boss Ileana, the Superintendent I was replacing, introduced me to folks, shared insights, encouragement, and often laughed at what was to be her last conference as the North Rockland Superintendent. Almost as an afterthought, she suggested we attend a pop-up session scheduled on the final day of the conference that discussed what at the time seemed like just another worst-case scenario about a potential threat, the Corona-19 virus. Little did I know that in just two short weeks, our schools would be closed for the remainder of the year, and education, politics, health care, entertainment, and culture would never again look the same.
When we first closed, I felt similar to the musicians who refused to stop entertaining passengers as the Titanic sank. The world seemed to be ending, but our team of administrators and clerical staff were busy assembling and copying work packets for students to complete while this Corona issue was worked out. I am sure we all lost a few years off of our lives those days by breathing in the fumes from the Lysol we were incessantly spraying on the packets and throughout the office, or maybe it was just me spraying that stuff. How did I get here? An Assistant Superintendent for Instruction who had, throughout his career, advocated for meaningful, thought-provoking assignments, basically the exact opposite of what we were spending our time doing. I was completely shocked when the lines to receive these packets rivaled those for Cabbage Patch dolls circa 1985. What I didn’t realize at the time was that a shift was happening. In a time of uncertainty, schools were becoming more: more important, more volatile, more controversial, more to blame, more to praise, just more, fair or not.
Long gone are the days of children going off to school, sitting in rows, and listening as intently as possible to the directions of school personnel for fear of parental repercussions. The Pandemic served as an accelerant to what had already been shifting. Schools were and are continuing to become the hub of their communities.
Parents are looking for answers in a desperate time in which one in three female teenagers have had suicidal thoughts and three in five young people have persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness (as reported by the CDC in February of 2023.)
Schools have become the battleground for a political agenda in which extremists on the left and the right pontificate about their political views via social media platforms with vigor, passion, and bravado due to their anonymity and lack of consequences. Districts and communities are charged with staying united as those with a political agenda aim to divide.
Most importantly, though, schools have become institutions of healing as parents, students, and staff recover from the not-always-apparent trauma most of us are trying to manage.
Schools have changed, and the debates are no longer about which teams are getting the best uniform, who my teacher is, and whether my child is learning and growing as a student and a person. Now district leaders must be ready to debate the merits of the books in our libraries or should we have armed guards. Questions arise about why schools have the audacity to present students with all sides of an issue, particularly ones in which parents are sure they are on the right side of history.
It is scary to think we are living in a world that is all too similar to the ones described in books I read as a middle schooler, such as Fahrenheit 451. The challenge is to provide students with the skills necessary to formulate their own opinions, participate in civil discourse, listen to others, and be open to the possibility that an opinion different from theirs may have merit. Many citizens long for a time when they didn’t know or care who their neighbors voted for. Today, we seem to be heading toward a place in which politics serves as another avenue to foster hate.
These are scary times, but I have hope. The Pandemic has left educators with tools they may not have acquired in such a short time. We are now more efficient and creative than ever before. We have become pros on virtual platforms and have embraced our role as teachers, cheerleaders, mentors, and supporters. We have been forced to examine what is truly a priority in our courses, classes, and grade levels. We now know it is essential that we meet kids where they are at, and more and more of us understand now what Rick Wormelli has been teaching us for years, that what is Fair isn’t Always Equal.
We have a daunting task ahead of us. We must protect what is great about our schools and our Country’s education system without the fear of change. We must be willing to adjust and overhaul. Our schools should no longer be exemplary at developing factory workers. Instead, we need to focus on developing thinkers, problem solvers, and leaders who embrace service. We must protect democracy, civility, and knowledge. It can be overwhelming at times, but as I spoke about while delivering a TEDX talk, “If not us who?”
Recently I have discovered my motivation, my fuel when feeling down, my why as (Simon Sinek says), is working directly with students. Sure, it sounds cliche, but why else get into education but to work with young people? The inconvenient truth is the further you move away from the classroom, the easier it becomes to forget that “why,” to become out of touch and disconnected.
It seems counterintuitive that those with the biggest influence on how young people spend their formative years often have little authentic interactions with those very young people they are responsible for guiding into adulthood. For me, the solution is working directly with kids. It can be by covering classes, reading to students, or leading student groups. Without fail, when I work with kids, my day becomes brighter, and why I chose this field becomes clear. I would encourage all educators to work with students in a more authentic and direct manner. My work with students has been the best professional development since moving to a central office position and now the Superintendent’s seat.
I had only been on the job for a few weeks when two young black women who attended our high school asked to meet with me. These passionate and articulate student leaders were angry, frustrated, and scared. We were in the middle of the shutdown, and despite the computer barrier between us, I could feel their energy and heightened desire to do something about their feelings of frustration around the injustices that the George Floyd murder shined a light on. Out of that initial meeting, the student group “Voice” was born. Nilah and London, as President and Vice President of Voice, developed an application via Google Meet that was distributed to the student body.
The introduction to the application is below:
Voice will be comprised of a diverse group of students in grades 9-12. The purpose of the group will be to provide a venue for students to be heard and to offer suggestions for making our school a better place for ALL students! Dr. Felicello, Nilah, and London Blenman will facilitate monthly meetings that will allow the group to discuss issues such as racial inequity in North Rockland, develop skills on how to make effective change and work together to implement initiatives that will make our school a more inclusive place.
Due December 23rd, 2020
Space is limited, so please submit your application ASAP
Black, Latinx and POC are highly encouraged to join!
After reviewing applications, approximately 20 students were accepted, and the work began! We meet monthly for approximately two hours to learn from each other, grow together, and embrace the beauty and strength of diversity. Ultimately, our goal is to make our school a more accepting, welcoming place for all students, regardless of their background or how they identify.
Voice Mission: We are a group of diverse North Rockland High Schools students who wish to amplify the thoughts and ideas of the student body. Our group hopes to raise awareness by educating those in our school community and the community at large to embrace the diversity of thought, increase empathy and unify the citizens of North Rockland.
Life as a Superintendent is one in which you rarely have time to catch your breath, so as you can imagine, I rarely have the time to dedicate to VOICE and other student groups. However, I find I care more about the activities I plan with my students than the adult lead sessions I run. I refuse to cancel these meetings or just go through the motions no matter how much I have on my plate, and for good reason. My wife says I seem to be my happiest after working with “my kids” and “light up” when I talk about them. That is certainly true, but what she doesn’t see is how much I learn from them, how much I respect them, and how much they can accomplish when they are empowered.
I truly believe we are moving the needle, raising awareness, and projecting their truth. Young people, like adults, can do great things, have creative ideas, and look at the world more refreshingly than we do as adults.
I am proud of the work we have done, such as our faculty literature awareness initiative (linked here) and District policy and procedure adjustments that were driven by these students as well as the speakers we have brought to our staff and students. I am also excited about the projects we are working on, such as an HBCU-specific college fair, partnering with The Center for Safety and Change, and a High School wellness center for students, to name a few.
While these initiatives are wonderful and something we are all proud of, the relationships I have built with these students and their families, the lessons they have taught this middle-aged white male who grew up in a non-diverse region of upstate New York, and the thought-provoking discussions, sometimes controversial that our work has to lead to, have been life and career changing for me. Thanks to these students, I am a more knowledgeable, empathetic, more in-touch educator who is determined to improve our schools and provide our students with all the experiences and tools they deserve so they can pursue their dreams.
There have been bigger changes to how we do school over the past three years than any time in the past 100 years. We’d do things differently now, and it’s obvious that more adjustments are needed. I suspect the answers we are looking for are right there, an untapped resource that can drive school reform, and that resource is the students we are responsible for.
I encourage all educators who want to improve, who want to make schools better for kids, who want to bring us together instead of driving us apart, to work with kids in a different capacity. Trust them, listen to them, get to know them, and work with them as partners. You may feel like you do not have the time, I would argue that if we are serious about schools becoming the pillars of our communities, beacons of strength and fairness, then our schools should be dedicated to helping students become the best version of themselves, If we are serious about school reform, the time to start is now!
The reading wars have become more inflamed in the past few weeks. With recent podcasts and other posts, the social media branch of the Science of Reading has doubled down on its pronouncements that Balanced Literacy is at the root of today’s reading problems. The suggestion has been made that major publishers like Heineman are in it for the money, and they are selling products they know are inferior. That makes for a great public relations campaign. It makes for terrible science. Please consider the following:
It is not settled science.
Researchers talking to the Washington Post say that it is not settled science LINK, P.L. Thomas says it is not settled science LINK. Most importantly, The Executive Summary of the Reading ResearchQuarterly says we are not there yet to establish a Science of Reading. LINK. Given all that, common sense says the claim by Moats and her followers that it is settled and that they represent the one and only SOR is not justified.
There are problems with the social media version of SOR
Moats’ approach makes almost exclusive use of synthetic phonics. Analytic phonics is ignored or viewed as an inferior approach. There is considerable evidence that programs based on Moat’s approach don’t work for all kids. The Hechinger Report found OG isn’t a magic bullet LINK. A full decade of using synthetic phonics in England has had equivocal results LINK. Reports from Australia indicate that some children don’t progress even after years of synthetic phonics LINK. The research backing up claims of SOR success often uses weak standards LINK. Common sense dictates that we have other things ready when SOR fails to do the job for selected groups of children.
Through podcasts and other social media posts, critics of Balanced Literacy have carried out vicious attacks claiming BL has failed. Their attacks totally misrepresent what BL is about. Their data “proving” BL doesn’t work doesn’t hold up under close scrutiny. Too often, the attacks are based on complete misrepresentations of the actual facts LINK. Also, despite research around the long-term negative impact of retention,LINK, LINK, LINK, they laude the success of literacy programs like the one in Florida, which include retention as part of the program.
What is Balanced Literacy? Consider this excerpt from the 5th edition of Michael Pressley’s upcoming book.
“.. The cover of this book states that the topic is balanced reading instruction, a term that has recently become associated with meaning emphasis or whole-language approaches to teaching reading. I urge readers not to make that assumption, as this book does not fully support meaning-emphasis (whole language) or skills-emphasis instruction (phonics); it rather pulls the research for the many components required of reading and presents the most effective instructional approaches based on reading research…” (bolding is mine)
For a complete view of BL and what is really done in BL, readers are also invited to read Fisher & Fry’s book about Balanced Literacy LINK.
The story currently being told on social media claims that districts have been buying programs that don’t work for decades. Common sense dictates that even the most gullible folks would never keep buying things that don’t work over that length of time. There is plenty of data showing that BL works for many students LINK, LINK, LINK, LINK.
To some degree, both sides are right, and both sides are wrong.
We’ll begin with the thought that both BL and the constellation of practices encouraged by SOR help some but not all. My dissertation focused on the last round of the reading wars. One of my committee members had an important insight into those wars. He said, “Sam, the reading wars have never really been about phonics vs. no phonics. They have always been about my phonics (analytic) vs. your phonics (synthetic). During the ensuing years (2000-present), many districts adopted programs that favored analytic phonics (meaning emphasis) approaches and deemphasized synthetic phonics (code emphasis)—doing things that way WAS NOT a complete failure. Kids were getting phonics. Analytic phonics did work for many of them. But it did not meet the needs of all the children.
I am critical of both “sides.” We have tried (or we are trying) both ways of teaching phonics and found both helped some but not others. We are at a crossroads. If we go to either extreme (mainly meaning emphasis) or the other (mainly code emphasis), some children will not be helped. Common sense dictates that we must find a way to provide both approaches to phonics and give each child the kind of phonics instruction that is most likely to help. That is a topic for a future blog.
There is more to comprehension than providing background LINK. Teaching comprehension strategies requires the use of the time-consuming gradual release model. Yet some SOR advocates call for reducing the amount of time that we spend teaching comprehension strategies. Duke’s work around the Active Reading Model and the Sciences of Reading is compelling LINK, LINK. It makes more sense than the “provide background knowledge & all will be well” approach.
The weaponization of research. Some folks use the SOR label in order to sell a particular program. See what Jorden Page says in this blog entry LINK. Also, consider Rachel Gabriel’s thoughts on this topic LINK.
.
Finding common ground and common practices.
I’ve often explained my centrist point of view LINK and my concept of a Reading Evolution LINK. They are rooted in P.D. Pearson’s concept of “The Radical Middle” LINK. I want to take special note of something Pearson said in that paper:
“In educational research, more generally, I find the debate about qualitative versus quantitative research about as compelling as the new phonics versus whole language debate. I cannot imagine why any field of inquiry would want to limit itself to a single set of tools and practices. Even though I find both debates interesting and professionally useful, I fear the ultimate outcome of both, if they continue unbridled by saner heads, will be victory for one side or another. That, in my view, would be a disastrous outcome, either for reading pedagogy or educational research…”
The common sense solution of cutting through the Gordian Knot around the issue of how to best teach reading is to use the best ideas from all sides.
Doing that is the key to identifying common ground. Districts must create a curriculum first, find materials and programs to fit it and implement it. The key to making that implementation happen is informed, empowered teachers working within that curriculum. Districts must be allowed to create a curriculum that fits their particular children the best. They should not be forced to buy expensive programs that may or may not fit their needs, especially since research-based alternatives are available. LINK.
So as I first said four years ago- it’s time to walk the centrist path and create a Reading Evolution. Dare to dream!
Dr. Bommarito has a 51-year career in education, teaching every grade from K through graduate school. He has served as chair of both the St. Louis and the Missouri ILA affiliates. He’s made numerous presentations at ILA (formally IRA) conferences, including national conferences. In spring 2022, he was a featured speaker at the LitCon conference. the main speaker at Albany New York’s ILA conference. Most of his career was spent working in Title 1 buildings as a reading specialist and/or staff developer. He has a weekly blog about literacy https://doctorsam7.blog/
The world is full of patterns. When we see a red octagonal sign while driving, we immediately think, “STOP!” Football fans can instantly recognize the shape of a goalpost and know what it’s used for. And when we hear the melody to a familiar song (think “Wheels on the Bus’ or “The Star-Spangled Banner”), we immediately recall the words. If you have a dog or cat at home, you are probably attuned to the pattern of the barks and mews. Indeed, look around the room in which you are in right now, and your are likely to see many patterns—from the way the ceiling tiles or lights are arranged to the way the classroom desks are arranged, or to the pattern of the quilt covering the couch.
Patterns can be defined as a regular and repeated arrangements of shapes, letters, lines, numbers, colors, and sounds that can serve as guides. As human beings, we are predisposed to detect patters in our environments. Our ability to see, hear, feel, and identify patterns makes our lives safer, easier to negotiate, and more productive.
Besides the types just mentioned, linguistic patterns can be used in teaching reading and writing. Of course, the letters of the alphabet and phonemes they represent are among the first patterns we teach children. Interestingly enough, we often teach the letters to young children with a song—The Alphabet Song—which itself is a patterned text.
However, there are many other patterns that can be used in teaching reading—patterns that can make learning more productive and more efficient for students. In this blog, I will share a few that I found to be very helpful in teaching children to read in the Kent State University reading clinic: Camp Read-A-Lot.
Help Students See Word Patterns: Phonemic Word Families/Phonograms/Rimes
One of the most widely used linguistic patterns taught in the primary grades are the phonemic word families—also known as phonograms or rimes. A phonemic word family is a part of the syllable that begins with the vowel (every syllable by definition needs to have a vowel or vowel combination) and all other letters that follow the vowel represent a regular or consistent set of phonemes or language sounds. For example, -each in ”teach”, and the –ent in the second syllable of “student” are word families. The significance of word families is that they are regularly occurring letter patterns that represent regularly occurring sound patterns. Not only does knowledge of –each help a developing reader decode the word “teach,” but it can also help students decode “beach, breach, peach, preach, reach” and even longer, more complex words: “preacher, teachable.” Indeed, in a seminal article, Dr. Edward Fry identified thirty-eight-word families, knowledge of which allows readers to decode over 650 single-syllable words. Moreover, the number of multisyllabic words that can be decoded from knowledge of these letter patterns is in the thousands. For example, the word family –am finds its way into ambulance, camera, family, hamster, and many more.
If we have this natural ability to see patterns, why not use them with students in our teaching of phonics and word decoding? Dr. Fry’s thirty-eight-word families could easily be taught once per week in first grade. Students would leave with the ability to analyze and decode a multitude of English words.
Enlarge Students’ Vocabulary With Morphemes – Word Roots
Phonograms or word families are not the only letter patterns worth teaching. Morphemes are word parts or patterns that not only represent a consistent or regular occurring sound, they also represent meaning and, as such, are well worth teaching if your goal is to expand students’ vocabularies or knowledge of word meanings. Another common name for morphemes is roots. Some of the most common morphemes in English derive from Latin and Greek. The logic behind the use of morphemes in reading instruction is the same as with teaching phonograms—knowledge of one morpheme can help students unlock the meaning to many words—in some cases over 100 English words.
The numerical prefix bi– can be found in English words such as bifocals, biplane, bicycle, biannual, bipartisan, and many more. Similarly, base word roots, morphemes that are the foundation of words, help form the meaning of many English words. Knowing that ject- means “to throw” can help students determine or affirm the meaning of words such as: eject, inject, object, object, reject, interject, conjecture, and many more. Indeed, it has been estimated that the word root trac/tract, meaning pull, draw, drag, is found in over 140 English words! Moreover, most of our multisyllabic words in English as well are academic words (think science, social studies, mathematics) are made of morphemic word roots.
Again, the logic then suggests that teaching a limited number of morphemes or word roots can give students patterns that will allow them to determine the meaning (and sound representation) to a near-limitless number of English words. Then, teaching morphemic word patterns should be seen as the natural follow-up to teaching phonemic word families or phonograms. (Find out more about teaching word roots in my blog article: “A Little Latin (and Greek), and a Whole Lot of English Building Vocabulary with Word Roots,” on the Robb Review – https://therobbreviewblog.com/uncategorized/a-little-latin-and-greakk/
Teach Reading With Poetry: Use Textual Language Patterns
Beyond individual word patterns, we also have language patterns that exist at the text level. Of course, when talking about teaching reading to children, I am referring to poetry for children. Poetry, and I’m including song lyrics as well, follow highly predictable patterns in terms of rhythm and rhyme. That is why poetry, especially poetry and rhymes for children, is so easy to learn. Nearly all children in primary grades can easily recite a plethora of nursery rhymes, poems, and song lyrics. How many of us, as adults, can easily recall song lyrics and poems that we last heard years ago? The textual patterns make them easy to remember.
When working with younger readers, we want them to meet success in learning to read. What better way to ensure success to learn to read poems or other patterned texts each day or two. Of course, such learning requires repetition, and repetition (repeated reading of actual texts is a hallmark of reading fluency development.
One more thing that’s worth noting about poetry for children: most poems rhyme. Returning to what I had previously mentioned, words belonging to particular word families (phonograms or rimes) generally rhyme. So, the use of poetry as a way to develop fluency and success in reading connected text can also be sued as a wonderful way to follow up word family phonics instruction. After learning the –eep word family and associated words, your students can read, reread, and eventually perform Little BoPeep. Instruction with the –ick and –ock word families can be followed with Hickory Dickory Dock.
In Kent State’s Camp Read-A-Lot reading clinic, where young students make remarkable progress in reading in as little as five weeks of instruction, our goal is for students to learn to read something well each and every day of instruction. And that something is usually a poem or a song. Moreover, the poems and songs that students learn are usually tied to the phonemic word families they are also learning.
Sometimes our teachers/clinicians are unable to find a poem along with a word family under instruction. In such cases, the clinicians write their own poems. One added benefit of poetry is that the patterns in poetry can easily be parodied to write new poems that follow the patterns of already-known poems. For example, the nursery rhyme “Diddle Diddle Dumpling My Son Jon” was rewritten by a clinician to reinforce the –ag word family:
Diggle daggle dumpling, Aggie and Mag
Had a dog, and his name was Tag
Tag had a tail that would wiggle and wag
Diggle daggle dumpling, Agnes and Mag.
Imagine the sense of accomplishment Taylor felt as he stood in front of classmates and family members to perform his own poem. Teaching and learning doesn’t get any better than that!
Find out more about teaching and using poetry in my blog article: “Why Poetry, Let Me Count the Ways,” on the Robb Review: https://therobbreviewblog.com/?s=poetry
References and Resources
Fry, E. (1998). The most common phonograms. The Reading Teacher, 51, 620-622.
Harrison, D., Rasinski T.V., & Fresch, M. (2022). Partner Poems & Word Ladders for Building Foundational Literacy Skills: Grades K-2 and 1-3. New York: Scholastic.
Rasinski, T. V., Padak, N., Newton, R. & Newton, E. (2020). Building Vocabulary with Greek and Latin Roots: A Professional Guide to Word Knowledge and Vocabulary Development (2nd ed.). Huntington Beach, CA: Shell Educational Publishing. (Professional Development Book)
Rasinski, T. V., Padak, N., Newton, R., & Newton, E. (2019). Building Vocabulary from Word Roots. Huntington Beach, CA: Shell Educational Publishing. (Vocabulary Instruction Kit for Grades K to 11).
