# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are You Tapping into Prior Knowledge Often Enough in Your Classroom?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Blogger Rebecca Alber explains why using students’ prior knowledge to guide instruction is key to learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the great debates in close reading is whether or not we should frontload (or pre-teach) before students do a close reading. Often, close reading lessons start with a cold read, when students start reading text without any lesson beforehand. While this approach has merit, there are many reasons frontloading has a place in close reading lessons.

Frontloading ensures that students maximize their time with the text by giving them just enough information so they gain traction as they enter the text. It's also an authentic way that readers start reading.

Think about the way you approach texts. The last time you were in a bookstore, or shopping for a book online, you may have read the back cover or the online summary. You may have read the Amazon or New York Times reviews to find out more about the plot and what other readers thought of the book. If a friend recommended the book, you may have asked a few questions about the topic or plot. Perhaps you quickly Googled information about the author, the setting, or the historical time period before you read. These are all forms of frontloading.

This is not to say that we need to teach entire lessons before students read. But, frontloading just enough information so that students can get started with a book may be just the ticket to help them with deeper analysis. Strong frontloading lessons activate students' background knowledge, provide them with just enough information to gain traction with the text, increase student motivation, and are woven into the broader purpose for reading.

We can also teach students how to do their own frontloading. Teach them how to skim a text to grasp quick facts about the who, what, and where. Have them scan headings, subheadings, and graphics that may activate their background knowledge or help them form questions to think about as they read. Talk to peers who have read the book before, or have experience with the topic. Encourage students to do a quick online search (of reputable sources) to answer initial questions about a topic or text.

Making frontloading an authentic experience that students engage in, rather than a laundry list of vocabulary words or facts-to-know before reading, adds depth to close reading lessons and makes frontloading a skill rather than a scaffold.

Where do you come down in the frontloading debate? How do you start your close reading lessons?
Samantha Cleaver is an education writer, former special education teacher, and avid reader. Her book, Every Reader a Close Reader is scheduled to be published by Rowman and Littlefield in 2015. Read more at her blog: www.cleaveronreading.wordpress.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Case for Frontloading: Why Kids Should Talk about Texts Before they Read Them - WeAreTeachers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of the great debates in close reading is whether or not we should frontload (or pre-teach) before students do a close reading. Often, close reading lessons start with a cold read, when students start reading text without any lesson ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Anticipation Guide
Pre-Reading Strategy

The Anticipation Guide uses the age old practice of activating background knowledge before learning new information related to that knowledge. Research shows that by getting students to connect what they know with what they may learn, the teacher can deepen their engagement and purpose for reading. Students read better if they bring to reading what they bring to the rest of life: that need to anticipate. This strategy uses students' prior knowledge to encourage them to make a connection to what they will be reading and give them a chance to become an active participant with the text before reading begins.

Steps:

1. Read the text you are going to assign and identify key concepts you would like your students to understand, challenge, or both.
2. Compose four to eight statements that are likely to challenge your students' beliefs about the topic or express an opinion about it.
3. Arrange the statements in a True-False or You-Author format.
4. Ask students to complete the Anticipation Guide individually before reading the text to which it relates.
5. Discuss their responses, making efforts to highlight possible conflicts between their beliefs and the content of the text they are to read.
6. After the discussion, ask students to read the material.
7. Ask students to review their responses to the Anticipation Guide when they complete their reading of the text material. Students should discuss the author's feelings about the AG statements and any changes in their own thinking as a result of the reading.

Source: CONTENT AREA READING AND WRITING: FOSTERING LITERACIES IN MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL Norman Unrau

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Anticipation GuidePre-Reading Strategy The Anticipation Guide uses the age old practice of activating background knowledge before learning new information related to that knowledge. Research shows that by getting students to connect what they know with what they may learn, the teacher can deepen their engagement and purpose for reading.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
reading strategies

content areas

online training

families reading
together

An Anticipation/Reaction Guide utilizes a twin strategy to increase reading comprehension: stimulate prior knowledge and experiences before reading and then reinforce key concepts after reading.

Anticipation/Reaction Guide

The guide presents students with a series of leading questions to be answered in writing before reading.

Students then share their answers in a class discussion designed specifically to "activate, or better "reactivate," prior knowledge. This review of prior knowledge helps students "connect" with the topic.

Students read the text passage and then evaluate their written answers (prior knowledge). Students should note when their answers agree or disagree with the text's content.

Finally, students engage in a summarizing discussion, expressing how the reading selection reinforced or challenged their prior knowledge.

Steps to Constructing and Using Anticipation Guides:

1. Outline the main ideas in a reading selection. Write the ideas in a short list (no more than 5 or 6 points), using clear declarative statements. Do not include generalizations or abstractions in this list.

2. Rewrite the main statements in the form of questions to prompt the students' prior knowledge and to elicit student reactions and predictions.

3. Have students write responses to each of the questions. These written responses should include any necessary explanation or evidence.

4. Allow students to openly discuss their answers/predictions prior to reading. Note any recurring themes in the discussion. Also, note any opposing or contradictory points of view.

5. Have students read the selected passage. Instruct students to make comments on their written answer sheet, noting agreement and disagreement between their answers and the author's message or purpose.

6. Encourage open discussion of these comments. Chart common themes of agreement and disagreement. Focus especially on student ideas and attitudes that change during the reading.

Learn More:

Duffelmeyer, F.A., Baum, D.D., & Merkley, D.J. (1987). "Maximizing reader-text confrontation with an extended anticipation guide." Journal of Reading, 31, 146-150.

Lenski, Susan D., Wham, Mary Ann, & Johns, Jerry L. (1999). Reading and learning strategies for middle and high school students. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Manzo, A.V., Manzo, U. C., Estes, T. H. (2001), Content area literacy: Interactive teaching for active learning. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Readence, J.E., Bean, T.W., & Baldwin, R.S. (1998). "Prereading strategies-anticipation guides." In Content area literacy: An integrated approach (6th ed., pp. 159-161). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Embedded Questions

Anticipation Guide

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
reading strategies content areas online training families reading together An Anticipation/Reaction Guide utilizes a twin strategy to increase reading comprehension: stimulate prior knowledge and experiences before reading and then reinforce key concepts after reading. Anticipation/Reaction Guide The guide presents students with a series of leading questions to be answered in writing before reading.

# data[].attributes.body
Strategies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Frontloading Vocabulary in Core Content Classes: Instructional Strategies | W&M School of Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Virginia Department of Education lists the Frayer Model (see Figure 1) as an instructional strategy for teaching math vocabulary. As illustrated, the targeted vocabulary word is placed in the center of the graphic with the definition, characteristics, and examples surrounding it. Identifying non-examples is helpful in developing a fuller understanding of that word.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Anticipation Guide | Classroom Strategy | Reading Rockets

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An anticipation guide is a comprehension strategy that is used before reading to activate students’ prior knowledge and build curiosity about a new topic. Before reading, students listen to or read several statements about key concepts presented in the text; they’re often structured as a series of s…

# data[].attributes.body
Short Videos- Math and Science

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This comprehension strategy activates students' prior knowledge, builds curiosity about a new topic before learning about it, and then checks for understanding after the topic is presented. Before beginning the lesson, students listen to or read several statements about key concepts within the new content and choose whether they agree or disagree.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
( noun) A brief portion of a lesson given at the very beginning to get students' attention, activate prior knowledge, and prepare them for the day's learning. Also known as advance organizer, hook, or set induction.

When you start a lesson, you could begin it with something like this: Today we're going to continue our study of hygiene. Or you could get more creative: You could come into the room, your hair a mess, with dirt under your fingernails, stained clothing, your teeth covered in yellow goo, with little signs taped all over you that say scabies, diarrhea, hepatitis A, hookworm, and lice.

Which of these two approaches will be better at grabbing students' attention?

The second one is an example of a creative anticipatory set - a bit at the very beginning of a lesson that focuses students on what they are going to learn that day. Anticipatory sets can be very simple, like sharing a brief anecdote that connects to the lesson or giving students a problem to work out, or they can require more planning, like performing a short skit or showing a series of thought-provoking images. The point of the anticipatory set is to get students curious, wake up their brains, and give them a taste of what they are about to learn.

For me, the anticipatory set was one of the most neglected components of my teaching, second only to the post-lesson reflection. It was enough work to plan a good lesson; tacking on the anticipatory set was an extra mile I rarely managed to run. But when I did, it always paid off. With a well-crafted, well-executed anticipatory set, instruction becomes an art.

The term "anticipatory set" was coined by Madeline Hunter in the 1960's, when she developed a lesson plan model that became so widely adopted, her name isn't even always attached to it anymore. (For an updated version of her work, see the 2004 manual Madeline Hunter's Mastery Teaching ).

So it's a standard part of a classic lesson plan. But does it work? If you make an effort to add an anticipatory set to your lesson, will students actually learn more?

The research says yes. Although it has been examined under a few different names, a number of studies over the past several decades support its use: Schuck (1969) concluded that students whose teachers were trained in the use of set induction "will achieve significantly higher than those exposed to teachers not trained in this instructional skill" (Schuck, p. 792). Educational psychologist David Ausubel spent much of his career advocating for the use of advance organizers, and his theories were further refined and supported by other research, both focused studies (Townsend, & Clarihew, 1989) and broad meta-analyses (Luiten, Ames, & Ackerson, 1980). In four studies analyzed by Robert Marzano and his colleagues, students whose instruction included advance organizers showed percentile gains ranging from 9 to 29 points (Marzano, Pickering & Pollock, 2001, p. 117). Those number are definitely enough to justify making anticipatory sets a regular part of your practice.

If you make the effort to add an anticipatory set to your lesson, follow these guidelines to make sure you maximize its impact:

It should have a relevant, content-based connection to the most essential part of the day's learning, rather than a superfluous one. If you're teaching students about nutrition, bringing in grapefruit slices for students to taste won't do a whole lot to teach them about a balanced diet. But that same fruit will have much more relevance to a chemistry lesson on acids and bases.

It should be followed by a clear bridge to the day's learning objectives. Once the anticipatory set is done, rather than just jump right into the lesson, take a minute to escort students into it by saying something like, "The reason your lips are pursing together is because of the acid in the fruit, and today we're going to get a better understanding of the chemistry behind that taste."

It should reappear during the lesson. For the anticipatory set to have meaning, refer back to it during the lesson. When you're taking a look at the chemical composition of acids, mention the grapefruit again. The added bonus of doing this is that students will come to expect that whatever weird thing you do at the beginning of class, it's going to end up meaning something later.

Although the impact of anticipatory sets varies depending on the type and delivery, what's clear is that lessons with them generally help students learn and retain information better than lessons without them. ♦

Want lots of great ideas for anticipatory sets? Visit my brand-new store on Teachers Pay Teachers, where you'll find 40+ fantastic ideas in Anticipatory Sets that will Knock Their Socks Off!
References:
Hunter, R. (2004). Madeline Hunter's mastery teaching. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Luiten, J., Ames, W. & Ackerson, G. (1980). A meta-analysis of the effects of advance organizers on learning and retention. American Educational Research Journal, 17: 211-18.

Marzano, R.J., Pickering, D.J., & Pollock, J.E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Schuck, R.F. (1969). The effects of set induction upon pupil achievement, retention, and assessment of effective teaching in a unit on respiration in the BSCS curricula. Educational Leadership, 2(5), 785-793. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_196905_schuck.pdf.

Townsend, M.A.R. & Clarihew, A. (1989). Facilitating children's comprehension through the use of advance organizers. Journal of Literacy Research, 21(1) 15-35.
Know Your Terms is my effort to build a user-friendly knowledge base of terms every educator should know. New items will be added on an ongoing basis. If you hear some term at a PD and don't want to admit that you don't know what it means, send it to me via the contact form and I'll research it for you. And I promise not to tell anyone you sent it: You can totally act like you knew it all along.

Like what you've seen so far?
If this one spoke to you, I'd love to have you come back for more.Join my mailing list and get weekly tips, tools, and inspiration - in quick, bite-sized packages - all geared toward making your teaching more effective and joyful. To thank you, I'll send you a free copy of my e-booklet, 20 Ways to Cut Your Grading Time in Half. I look forward to getting to know you better!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
( noun) A brief portion of a lesson given at the very beginning to get students' attention, activate prior knowledge, and prepare them for the day's learning. Also known as advance organizer, hook, or set induction. When you start a lesson, you could begin it with something like this: Today we're going to continue our study of hygiene.

# data[].attributes.body
Frontloading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I'll never forget reading Mosaic of Thought by Ellin Oliver Keene & Susan Zimmerman in college. While studying the benefits of strategy-based comprehension instruction, I was astonished to learn activating prior knowledge or schema was something that needed to be taught.

As a college student, I couldn't believe that wasn't something that was just common sense. Now as an educator, I know that activating prior knowledge is not common sense, but rather an important skill that needs to be taught to students.

STRATEGIES FOR HELPING READERS WITH SCHEMA
Like many teachers, I describe schema to my students as a filing cabinet in their heads.
As we get new information about a topic, we either add it to a folder of pre-existing information in our brain, or we create a new folder that we will continue to add information to as we get it.

It is important before we begin to read about a topic to go into our filing cabinet in our brain to activate our prior knowledge of the subject.

That background knowledge can help us better process new information and build upon what we already know.

Before reading, I teach my kids to activate prior knowledge by making a list about what they already know about a topic, creating a KWL chart, doing a turn and talk, brainstorming, or simply taking a moment to think silently.

During reading, I teach my students to make meaningful connections with the text to themselves, other texts, and the world. I also model how to make meaningful connections with think-alouds whenever I am reading to my students.
Activating prior knowledge is not only an important reading strategy for empowering students to be able to independently comprehend a text, it also serves as a confidence booster for those students that typically give up before even trying.
After reading, we discuss how our prior knowledge helped increase our understanding of the text.

By linking instruction to familiar topics, prior experiences, or students' interests, students will learn more effectively.

I also find the process of activating prior knowledge with my students useful for guiding my instruction. It helps me determine how much or how little they know about a topic, which will guide the amount of support I need to provide.

LESSON PLANS FOR ACTIVATING PRIOR KNOWLEDGE

Here are two lesson plans you can use with your third- and fourth-grade students to learn or review the reading strategy of activating prior knowledge.

I use the first lesson plan with my third-grade students. It's a four-day strategy lesson that uses multiple texts featuring bats. In this lesson, I use two picture books: Bat Loves the Night by Nicola Davies and Stellaluna by Janell Cannon. I also incorporate two nonfiction articles about bats from the San Diego Zoo.

I use the second lesson plan with my fourth graders. I use a similar format, but different texts. The nonfiction article is about Hyenas from National Geographic and the fiction texts are Pinduli by Janell Cannon and Harvesting Hope: The Story of Cesar Chavez by Kathleen Krull.

Download the two lesson plans now.

5 Tips for Choosing Nonfiction Texts Using the Six Signposts from Notice & Note
Related Articles:

photo © iStockphoto

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Strategies for Helping Readers: Activating Prior Knowledge

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I'll never forget reading Mosaic of Thought by Ellin Oliver Keene & Susan Zimmerman in college. While studying the benefits of strategy-based comprehension instruction, I was astonished to learn activating prior knowledge or schema was something that needed to be taught. As a college student, I couldn't believe that wasn't something that was just common sense.

# data[].attributes.body
Reading Rockets

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We've had our share of lively debates in the field of reading, but not on this particular topic: background knowledge. There is a virtual consensus that background knowledge is essential for reading comprehension. Put simply, the more you know about a topic, the easier it is to read a text, understand it, and retain the information. Previous studies (Alexander, Kulikowich, & Schulze, 1994; Shapiro, 2004) have shown that background knowledge plays an enormous role in reading comprehension (Hirsch, 2003).

The contribution of background knowledge to children's comprehension became all that more clear for us in a recent three-part experiment including 4-year olds from low- and middle-SES (socioeconomic status) families (Kaefer, Neuman, & Pinkham, in press). In the first experiment, we assessed low- and middle-SES children's background knowledge about birds by creating a task with fictional characters and names: "This is a toma. A toma is a bird. Can a toma live in a nest?" and other items in a similar format. The experiment revealed stark differences in knowledge about birds between the two groups: ( t(43) = 3.22, p = .002), Cohen's d = .93. Low-SES children had significantly more limited background knowledge than their middle-class peers.

So, to tap how these differences in background knowledge might relate to comprehension in text, we created an 18-page illustrated storybook in our second experiment that featured the adventures of four types of birds (named for extinct species): the moa, faroe, cupido, and kona. The book had a total of 238 words and shared a common plot and story grammar, including the setting (i.e., a house), problem, response, and resolution. Using a receptive comprehension measure that examined children's understanding of critical story events and their ability to make causal inferences, we found once again that the low-SES children experienced greater difficulty comprehending the story than their middle-SES peers. These children demonstrated significantly poorer comprehension of the text ( t(75) = 1.99, p = .050), with a moderate effect size (Cohen's d = .46).

Consequently, in our third study, we attempted to neutralize background knowledge by introducing a storybook narrative context that would be novel to both groups. Here was our reasoning: If children's preexisting background knowledge underlies these differences in comprehension, then we would expect that there would be no differences in learning among our differing SES groups. For this study, we created an 18-page illustrated storybook similar to the one we used in our previous study-with one difference: The storybook used a novel category, wugs (a pseudo-word), and was designed around the adventures of four species of wugs. And our results sustained our hypothesis about background knowledge and comprehension. In this case, there were no differences between groups ( t(56) = .57, p = .569, Cohen's d = .15). When we held background knowledge constant by introducing an unknown topic, there were no significant differences between SES groups in children's word learning, comprehension, or ability to make inferences. Taken together, these results suggest that differences in low-SES children's comprehension skills may be attributed, in part, to limitations in their preexisting knowledge base.

This research builds on a large body of work that has shown the effects of background knowledge and comprehension (Anderson & Nagy,1992; Anderson & Pearson, 1984). For example, studies have shown that individual differences in prior knowledge affect the ability to extract explicit and implicit information from text and integrate this text-based information in reading comprehension (Kintsch, 1988). Other studies (e.g., Cain, Oakhill, Barnes, & Bryant, 2001) have examined multiple factors, including the relative contributions of inferential processing, domain knowledge, metacognition, and working memory to learning from text. Our results are consistent with this research (Cain & Oakhill, 2011; Recht & Leslie, 1988), highlighting the role of background knowledge on children's comprehension as early as preschool.

Why is background knowledge so important?

It makes good sense that to comprehend a story or text, readers will need a threshold of knowledge about the topic. Sometimes we call it domain-specific knowledge or topical knowledge. Without such knowledge, it becomes difficult to construct a meaningful mental model of what the text is about. Consider the following examples.

Background knowledge enables readers to choose between multiple meanings of words

For example, think about the word operation. If you were to read the word in a sports article about the Yankees, you might think about Derek Jeter recovering from his latest baseball injury. If you read the word in a math text, on the other hand, you'd think about a mathematical process like multiplication or division. Words have multiple purposes and meanings, and their meanings in particular instances are cued by the reader's domain knowledge.

Reading and listening require readers to make inferences from text that rely on background knowledge

Even the most immediate oral language exchanges, like "What do you say?" to a young child who just received some Halloween candy, require some level of inferencing. From infancy on, oral language comprehension requires children to actively construct meaning by supplying missing knowledge and making inferences. This, of course, becomes even more complicated when we turn to written texts, since it may require students to make inferences based on limited information in the text itself. In fact, many of our greatest writers engage readers through their writing to think beyond the text.

Understanding text depends on readers supplying enough of the unstated premises to make coherent sense of what is being read. But to do this well, readers need to have a foundation of knowledge about the topic. Otherwise, as studies have shown, they can get caught on the "seductive details" (Garner, Gillingham, & White, 1989) of a text-highly interesting and entertaining information that is only tangentially related to the topic-which can distract the reader and disrupt the comprehension of text. Background knowledge, in contrast, acts as a road map for students, allowing them to stay on target despite the interesting details. This suggests that once print has been decoded into words, reading comprehension and listening comprehension requires the active construction of inferences that rely on background knowledge and are implicit in the text.

Literacy language requires background knowledge

Second-language learners know for certain that many metaphors, idioms, and other literary devices are based on background knowledge. For example, if we say that you "really hit the ball out of the park" after you gave a presentation to your colleagues, you would quickly understand the compliment. We know that it can't be taken literally because we know what the saying refers to. Writings are heavily dependent on metaphors and idioms. Studies (e.g., Ortony, Schallert, Reynolds, & Antos, 1978) have shown that idioms are often processed just as rapidly as literal meanings, indicating that we are constantly activating background knowledge in comprehension.

Informational text requires background knowledge

Informational text tends to have a greater density of vocabulary and concepts that are directly related to students' background knowledge (Price, Bradley, & Smith, 2012). And these demands placed on background knowledge only accelerate as students progress through the grade levels. Students will be required to apply previously learned concepts to increasingly complex text. They must read, discuss, and write about topics that are conceptually more difficult, and they will need to increasingly draw on intertextual linkages across subject areas. They'll be required to provide evidence from text, show deep and thorough understanding of these concepts, and think creatively about applying these concepts in new ways.

Consequently, in much of the literature in reading, we have focused on skills associated with comprehension: decoding, vocabulary development, strategy instruction, and metacognition, among many others. But what we can see from this brief summary is that we have given very little instructional time to a skill that can play an enormous role in comprehending text. We would venture to guess that students' understanding of text is unlikely to improve unless we begin to more deliberately teach background knowledge.

How to build background knowledge

The question then becomes, how do we build children's background knowledge? Core reading materials often encourage us to activate, support, build on, and tie to children's existing knowledge base. But what do we do when there is no existing knowledge base? Or when there is little to build on? If you asked us, for example, to read an elementary physics text building on our previous knowledge base of physics, you would likely see blank stares, akin to a deer in headlights.

This issue becomes even more complicated in the age of Common Core State Standards (CCSS). The CCSS place a premium on the amount of background knowledge we provide to children prior to reading a text. It's not that the standards negate background knowledge or its contribution to comprehension; rather, the authors of the publishers' guidance to the CCSS emphasize close reading, developing knowledge through text, regarding the deliberate and careful analysis of text as the gateway for developing independent readers (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers,2010).

Although at times, this clash of perspectives might seem like a catch-22, the problem is solvable. Teachers can effectively build children's background knowledge early on (Neuman & Wright, 2013). However, at the same time, we must recognize that knowledge is not just accumulating facts; rather, children need to develop knowledge networks, comprised of clusters of concepts that are coherent, generative, and supportive of future learning in a domain. Here's how we do it:

Begin by teaching words in categories. For example, you can try something as simple as this: "I'm going to say the following words:strawberries, bananas, papayas, pineapples. They all are a type of... (fruit)." Categories of objects begin to develop concepts, and the use of generic nouns (fruit) has been shown to be highly related to language and vocabulary development.

Use contrasts and comparisons. For example, you can give children puzzlers like, "Is an artichoke a type of fruit? Why is it or is it not a kind of fruit?" Puzzlers help children think outside the immediate context and consider the reasoning behind these contrasts and comparisons, which can further their understanding of categories and concepts.

Use analogies. An analogy is another type of comparison, but this time the comparison is made between two things that are usually thought to be different from each other. Analogies help children build knowledge because they compare something new to something we already know. For example, try something like, "bird is to feather as dog is to... (fur)." Children can use similes (comparisons using the words like or as) or metaphors (comparisons without using like or as) to build new knowledge.

Encourage topic-focused wide reading. Reading builds knowledge, but wide reading has typically been interpreted as reading about a lot of different topics, demonstrating breadth rather than depth in reading. Try this variation: Encourage children to identify an interest and read as many books as they can on one topic. What you find is that children will develop a deeper knowledge and expertise on a topic. These interests will drive children to read more.

Embrace multimedia. We often think that direct experiences are the most compelling ways to build knowledge. As many teachers can attest, there is nothing more thrilling than watching children engage in learning through direct experiences or seeing their delight and excitement on field trips and other activities. Although it is certainly not a replacement for real-life experiences, multimedia can often provide a wealth of information that we could only wish to experience firsthand. Further, it can introduce children to important words and concepts in a highly motivating way and build a shared knowledge base among all of your students.

Conclusion

The importance of background knowledge is especially salient in the age of Common Core. To meet the demands of these new standards, children will be expected to develop knowledge through text, both narrative and informational, within specified difficulty ranges at each grade level. Informational text, in particular, is likely to have a greater density of conceptual language and academic terms than typical storybooks or narrative texts. Consequently, these texts will place increasing demands on children's prior knowledge, further attenuating other risk factors.

Without greater efforts to enhance background knowledge, differences in children's knowledge base may further exacerbate the differences in children's vocabulary and comprehension. The imperative to foster children's background knowledge as a means for providing a firm foundation for learning, therefore, is greater than ever.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
To comprehend a story or text, young readers need a threshold of knowledge about the topic, and new, tougher state standards place increasing demands on children's prior knowledge. This article offers practical classroom strategies to build background knowledge such as using contrasts and comparisons and encouraging topic-focused wide reading.