Shifting winds

I am collecting student data on every step of the journey in terms of the previous discussed questions in response to the new text annotation strategies.  To determine if the strategies are being utilized judiciously, I had the students annotate a text using any strategy that seemed useful to them.  This was done twice, and both times the data illustrated that there are some strategies that are being over-used, while others are underused.  This led me to some questions regarding the nature of the underused strategies.   

• I am wondering if it is the nature of the text...as science informational text woud be better served if using visualizing and connect. 
• I am also curious if it could be the nature of the response questions the students are asked to do after reading the text?  It is known that the purpose in reading should drive how you respond to the text. 

The most utilized strategy is is summarize, and literature states that it is common to think of a 'good' reader as one who can summarize the content; however, in advance texts and courses, they may require more than just summarize to effectivey speak on the text.  I believe we need to move past summarize to really get into close reading.

I have noticed that today four students refered to text when they were struggling over a connection between characters in two different stories.  This is a huge shift for them, and I have not seen this type of growth from them before.  They were pulling quotes to provide evidence for the claim they were making.  I'm so proud of them!!

I am thinking I may need to spend a little more time marking the text strategies with the students and postpone rereading strategies.  I will change up the text to see if they can utilize a larger variety of strategies to increase comprehension of the content.