LITERACY AND THE COMMON CORE[This post is adapted from my forthcoming book, Literacy and the Common Core: Recipes for Action (Jossey-Bass), which is scheduled for release in August, 2014 and available for pre-0rder now!  This post appeared in slightly different form as a MiddleWeb Guest Article on May 13, 2014.]

Topic-Driven Assignments vs. Question-Driven Assignments

One day when I sat down with a high school English teacher who was revising her curriculum, she presented this problem: “Last year, the research paper took forever. And the results were terrible. I can’t go through that again. We need to do something different.”

Of course, cutting the research paper was not an option. So we tried to figure out what hadn’t worked.

“What was the assignment?” I asked.

“They had to write about a controversial topic,” she said. “And a bunch of them wrote about abortion, of course. Some of them wrote about drugs.” She shrugged. “Even though I collected their notes and outlines, their papers just made no sense.”

I nodded. I had been in her shoes and knew exactly how she felt. Awful.

We identified two primary causes of this problem: 1) The choice of topics—in fact, the assignment itself—was too broad, and 2) Students didn’t know how to build a coherent argument in part because they didn’t know how to pull out relevant evidence and explain it.

In a moment I’ll explain how we addressed these two issues. This scenario is, unfortunately, far too common. Because teachers know that giving students choices can strengthen their investment and interest in assignments, they often make the mistake of offering too many options or options that are too broad. “Write about whatever you want” (more or less the equivalent of “Write about a controversial topic”) almost never results in a well-argued, well-supported research paper. With a topic as the focus, in fact, students fail to realize that they need to build an argument. Topic-driven assignments tend to produce reports, which are little more than elaborated lists or descriptions. Moreover, the drive to accumulate information often leads students (whether purposefully or not) to plagiarize. And when every student is writing about a different topic, it’s impossible for the teacher to stay on top of how well they are all handling the material.

By contrast, question-driven assignments push students to build arguments in response. The difference is stark. Compare two papers: one called “Euthanasia,” the other “Why Is Euthanasia Controversial?” The former could say almost anything; the latter already has a clear focus.

The teacher I was working with decided to design a question-driven assignment, and in order to ensure that her students developed the reading and writing skills they needed, she also decided to limit the texts they would use so that she could do lots of modeling and closely monitor their progress. In short, she planned to use the DBQ approach….

How and Why to Take the Document-Based Question (DBQ) Approach

Though originally the purview of history and social studies teachers (they were first used on AP History exams and New York State Regents social studies exams), DBQs have begun to appear more widely across the curriculum. In fact, more and more teachers have started to realize that DBQs can prepare students in any grade or subject to be more effective at reading texts and writing about them.

The DBQ approach is simple: you give students an open-ended question and a half-dozen or so relevant texts, then require them to build an argument using the documents as evidence. It’s easier than a research paper because students don’t have to look for the documents. More importantly, it gives you a way to guide and monitor students’ progress since everyone is working with the same texts. You can and should model each step, from how to closely analyze different types of texts (essays, political cartoons, graphs, charts: anything!) to how to identify relevant evidence, how to organize ideas and information, and how to synthesize evidence and explanations logically to build compelling arguments.

By using an array of texts, you can also work on increasing text complexity.  As Bambrick-Santoyo, Settles, and Worrell note, you can “embrace the CCSS’s ‘ladder of text complexity’” by beginning with a simple passage on a topic to introduce key words, then move into a more complex passage that requires the same content knowledge but also adds new language.[1] This concept of starting with essential vocabulary and increasing complexity from text to text is important to apply throughout your instruction, of course, but it is particularly easy to see how it can work with the DBQ approach, where students read multiple texts that address the same question.

You can also differentiate DBQ projects in various ways. For example, you could group students based on their reading levels and supply them with relevant texts of different complexity (recognizing that while they might start in different places, they all need to move forward) so that they all have something to read independently, in addition to the shared texts that are on grade-level. Several middle school teachers I worked with did just that. They identified different-leveled texts about African-American historical figures (such as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Rosa Parks, and Jackie Robinson), taught students a common set of vocabulary (“compromise, stereotype, protest, boycott, prejudice,” and so on), modeled reading and writing strategies with an anchor text about Harriet Tubman, and created reading guides that included both generic questions (such as, “How did your historical figure’s childhood experiences contribute to his/her work later in life?”) and questions targeted to their assigned books. The reading and vocabulary-building work led to the ultimate writing assignment, which was an essay addressing these questions: “What were your historical figure’s greatest contributions to the Civil Rights Movement? In what ways did your historical figure show grit and determination?” Students also worked in groups to create timelines and posters, and participated in debates. PS: I’m not going to lie: creating this project was a ton of work for the teachers, but once it was done, they could use it again because it worked wonderfully.

If you want to add a research component to a DBQ, you can also teach some mini-lessons on research steps (such as evaluating Websites for bias, and so on) and require students to find some number of additional documents to support the ones already given.

Here’s the bottom line: taking the DBQ approach—in any grade or subject—can ensure that students learn how to read and write effectively about important questions in your class.

[1] Paul Bambrick-Santoyo, Aja Settles, and Juliana Worrell, Great Habits, Great Readers: A Practical Guide for K-4 Reading in the Light of Common Core (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2013), 15.


About theliteracycookbook

In addition to this blog, I am the creator of THE LITERACY COOKBOOK Website ( and ONLY GOOD BOOKS Blog (, and the author of THE LITERACY COOKBOOK: A Practical Guide to Effective Reading, Writing, Speaking, and Listening Instruction (Jossey-Bass, 2012) and LITERACY AND THE COMMON CORE: Recipes for Action (Jossey-Bass, 2014). Check out my Website for more information about my consulting work.
This entry was posted in Argument, DBQ Approach, ELA Common Core Standards, Evidence, Explanation, Literacy and the Common Core BOOK, Writing and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s