think about ways that terms are similar and different by using sentence stems provided by the teacher. This sort of structure helps students both make substantive comparisons and compare terms logically. Following are a few examples:
_________ and _________ are similar because they both:
• _________
• _________
_________ and _________ are different because:
• _________ is _________, while _________ is _________
• _________ is _________, while _________is _________
These stems help students structure their thinking and clearly express their thoughts. Thus, a student might compare circle and sphere as follows:
Circles and spheres are similar because they both:
• Have circumferences, radii, diameters, and surface areas
• Have perfect symmetry
Circles and spheres are different because:
• A circle is two-dimensional, while a sphere is three-dimensional
• A circle does not have volume, while a sphere does have volume
In this case, the student found similarities between the measurements and symmetries and differences between the dimensions and volume.
Venn diagrams are another structure that can help students compare and contrast characteristics of two to three terms. For example, a student might compare adage to idiom as shown in figure 2.4.
Figure 2.4: Venn diagram comparing adage and idiom.
Note that in the Venn diagram, each characteristic under adage corresponds to a characteristic beneath idiom. So, the first characteristic involves the term’s specificity to a certain language, the second involves literal meaning, and the third involves veracity.
Similar to the Venn diagram is the double bubble diagram. Here, students compare two terms by identifying their shared and unique characteristics. For example, if a student was comparing the terms base 10 and base 60, he or she might create a double bubble diagram like the one shown in figure 2.5. Each term is placed in a bubble, one on the right and one on the left. Characteristics of each are written in the surrounding bubbles. Shared characteristics are placed between the two terms; unique characteristics are placed around the outside of each term. Then, lines are drawn to show which characteristics are unique and shared. The double bubble diagram in figure 2.5 indicates that both the base 10 and base 60 systems used finger counting methods and were used in ancient cultures.
Figure 2.5: Double bubble diagram.
Like the diagrams presented previously, the double bubble diagram is a structure that can help students make and organize substantive comparisons between two terms.
Sometimes students need to compare and contrast more than two terms at a time, however. In these cases, students can use a comparison matrix, which examines several items according to several attributes. Like the Venn and double bubble diagrams, the matrix structures students’ comparisons and helps them identify meaningful similarities and differences between terms. The matrix, however, has the added advantage of accommodating a larger number of terms for comparison. For example, the comparison matrix in table 2.4 shows how a student might compare the three terms argumentative, informative/explanatory, and narrative.
The student first fills in his or her observations about each term relative to each attribute in the matrix. For example, the student observed that the purpose of argumentative writing is to convince someone of something. Once each cell has been filled in, the student examines the matrix and draws conclusions about similarities and differences between the terms, which are recorded at the bottom of the chart.
Table 2.4: Comparison Matrix for Argumentative, Informative/Explanatory, and Narrative
Classifying
Classification activities help students group like terms or concepts into categories. For example, an ELA teacher asks her students to classify the following terms based on their characteristics: adage, fore-shadowing, hyperbole, idiom, metaphor, personification, proverb, simile, stanza, tone, and verse. While the teacher could ask students to create their own categories, she decides to provide categories such as Figurative Language, Structural Features, and Literary Techniques. One student sorts the words as follows.
Figurative Language: hyperbole, idiom, metaphor, personification, simile
Structural Features: stanza, verse
Literary Techniques: adage, foreshadowing, proverb, tone
Classification activities can fall anywhere on a continuum from structured to open-ended. If the teacher provides both the words to sort and the categories, then the task is fairly structured. If the teacher provides only the words, the task will be more open-ended. The most open-ended version of a classification activity would involve students identifying both the words to sort and the categories in which to sort them. For example, a high-school math teacher whose students have been studying functions might ask students to look at all the words they had recorded in their vocabulary notebooks, select the ones they thought were most important for the study of functions, and create a classification scheme for those words. This exercise could allow students to think about words in new ways. A student might select the math words he thought most directly applied to functions and then flip to the ELA or cognitive verbs section of his notebook and identify words from those subject areas (such as relationship or derive) as well. Including those words would influence the student’s choices about which classification categories were most appropriate. Whether structured or open-ended, the key to successful classification activities is prompting students to group words into categories.
Creating Metaphors
Creating metaphors involves identifying similarities and connections between words at a figurative, abstract, or nonliteral level. For example, the phrase “he is the light of my life” uses a metaphor to describe one who is beloved. While people often associate light with joy, happiness, and security, a person cannot literally be luminescent. Consider a fifth-grade math teacher who asks her students to create metaphors using the term common denominator. One student says, “Common denominators are the dating websites of math,” and explains that in the same way that common denominators make it easier to add fractions, dating websites make it easier for couples to pair up. Students should not only create metaphors but also explain why they grouped the two terms together. To prompt and facilitate this explanation, a teacher might use the following sentence stem:
_________ is/are _________ because _________.
For
