Cabeza de Vaca's account of his journey is part of the literature of Spanish expeditionism. " since he was a famous Spanish explorers who discovered and investigated many new territories.
The text (or excerpt) is short.
The text is complex. (It contains challenging vocabulary, has some long and complex sentence structures, requires that students draw from background knowledge and/or experiences for understanding, uses a new or different text structure).
The text is central to or supports the unit of study - it is contextualized in the unit and, therefore, meaningful for student learning.
Each student has his/her own copy of the text. (In primary grades, the experience may be designed around a read aloud.)
(Optional) The length of the text may be differentiated for different groups of students, based on language proficiency or reading levels.
A subset of reading standards has been selected. (For ELL’s, specific language standards may also apply.)
The selected standards include Reading Standard 1 (text evidence) and Reading Standard 4 (meaning of words and phrases), which force students to stay “close” to the text.
The purpose (and the specific skills and strategies) are directly linked to the selected standards.
The purpose of the close reading experience is clearly stated for students. It explains the specific skills and strategies that students will practice.
•The first reading of the text is done independently. (In primary grades, within a
read aloud or shared reading.)
The student is asked to re-read to deepen understanding.
•The teacher reads portions of the text aloud, after an independent read (if needed)
There are specific, text-specific questions to guide reading, discussion and writing. The questions are directly related to the focus and identified standards.
Some questions target literal understanding and others require students to make inferences, analyze or make connections (depending on selected standards).
Some questions require students to cite textual evidence. RL 1 / RI 1 ANNOTATION (In primary grades, students may not be asked to annotate.)
Students annotate the text (using taught strategies) in order to prepare for discussions and writing.
The annotation strategy matches the purpose for reading and the standards selected.
Students have an opportunity to discuss specific questions in partnerships or in small groups (to ensure that every student can engage with the questions) before whole class discussion.
Discussion is embedded in every day of the close reading experience (if there are multiple days).
Protocols for discussion may be used as students are learning to engage effectively with each other.
Students have opportunities to consolidate their thoughts by drawing and/or writing. (Writing tasks vary in length, from short responses to longer pieces. They may be summaries, reactions, or responses to specific questions. They can be completed in class or at home.)
<span>Q1: The ability of an ecosystem to recover from damage.
In the text, it says "the resiliency of the reefs". From this we know that resiliency is a trait that the reefs have. In the next sentence, we see the context clues that define resiliency when it states "reefs bounce back-even flourish." When someone or something bounces back it recovers and returns to it's previous state.
Q2: to inform readers about how the coral reefs are being destroyed AND to convince readers that practices that destroy coral reefs must be stopped.
It is a "Check All That Apply" so more than one answer can be chosen. The passage title is "Save the Coral Reefs" and the selection ends with the sentence "More can be done now to help the coral reefs bounce back". These clues tell the reader that the author's purpose is to save the reefs. In order to do this the author needs to first explain how the reefs are being destroyed. Then convince readers to save the reefs by stopping the practices that destroy them.
Q3: "could help save" and "unsubstantiated risks".
It is important to pay attention to the question here. It is asking for phrases that support safety - not necessarily nutrition. A pixie stick is safe to eat, but not nutritious. The phrase "could help save" supports the idea that it is safe because it is being defined as possibly life and eye-saving. "Unsubstantiated risks" also shows safety because it state that any risks have not been proven and are therefore unfounded. Some of the other phrases such as "more vitamin A" and "more nutritious" support the argument that the food is healthier but are not used to specifically explain how safe it is.</span>
If the word is 'was', then it is a linking verb.
