Disciplinary Literacy Across Curriculum: Guide for Secondary Teachers

‍

‍

​

‍

Key Takeaways

• Disciplinary literacy moves beyond generic reading strategies to teach the specific ways experts in a subject read, write, and communicate.
• The Education Endowment Foundation identifies disciplinary literacy as a crucial step for improving secondary school literacy outcomes.
• Explicitly teaching Tier 2 and Tier 3 vocabulary through morphology helps learners decode complex subject-specific language independently.
• Graphic organisers reduce cognitive load by making abstract disciplinary thinking visible for all learners.
• Structured exploratory talk provides a vital bridge between reading complex academic texts and writing formal subject responses.
• Consistent routines scaffold the reading and writing process for learners with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) and English as an Additional Language (EAL) across different curriculum areas.
• Every teacher is responsible for teaching the specific communication rules and text structures of their own domain.

​

‍

What Is Disciplinary Literacy?

Disciplinary literacy is a tailored approach to teaching reading, writing, and communication skills specific to an academic subject. It moves away from generic reading comprehension tools and asks how an expert in a specific field approaches text. Historians read with a focus on bias and sourcing. Scientists read to extract objective facts and processes.

Shanahan & Shanahan (2008) found literacy develops. Early primary learners build basic literacy, like phonics. Intermediate literacy teaches summarising skills. Disciplinary literacy provides learners with skills for secondary school.

Learners cannot automatically transfer reading skills from an English lesson to a Physics lesson. The cognitive demands and structural rules of the texts are different. Moje (2015) argues that teaching these subject-specific practices is fundamentally an issue of equity and access. When we do not explicitly teach how to read a subject, we leave learners to guess the rules.

Generic reading strategies assume a uniform approach. Shanahan and Shanahan (2008) showed subject areas are different. Moje (2015) stated we must teach learners subject-specific rules. Shanahan et al. (2016) said explicit teaching helps clarify these rules.

The teacher displays a complex historical source on the board and models their internal monologue. They highlight the author and date, questioning the author's motives before reading the text. The learners then receive a different source and produce a written list of questions evaluating the new author's potential bias.

‍

​

‍

Why Disciplinary Literacy Matters

EEF (2019) says disciplinary literacy boosts secondary literacy. General literacy plans often skip subject-specific aims. Learners need GCSE paper language skills. Reading academic texts helps learner success (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2012).

Dense academic texts strain working memory. Sweller's (1988) cognitive load theory says unfamiliar words overload learners. They then decode words instead of processing the subject matter.

SEND and EAL learners are greatly affected by cognitive overload. They often understand texts at a surface level. Teachers must explain unwritten rules in texts (Sweller, 1988). Explicitly teach reading within subjects, reducing extra mental effort. Learners can then focus on subject concepts (Christodoulou, 2017).

High expectations require support structures. When we teach learners how to navigate a dense textbook page, we build their academic independence. They learn to tackle difficult texts rather than waiting for a summary.

The teacher identifies a dense paragraph in a geography textbook containing three new Tier 3 terms. They pre-teach these words using images and definitions before the class reads the text. The learners produce a visual glossary in their books connecting the new terms to the core geographical concept.

‍

​

‍

Disciplinary Literacy in Classrooms

To embed these practices, teachers need structured routines. The 'Map It, Say It, Build It' framework provides a pathway from decoding text to producing academic writing. This routine ensures that learners process information deeply.

‍

​

Strategy 1: Map It Visually

Visualisation helps experts grasp complex ideas (Clark & Paivio, 1991). Learners often lack this skill. Use graphic organisers, like diagrams, to aid learners' memory (Robinson, 1998). These visuals show subject-specific thought processes (Novak, 2010).

In history, this might be a timeline or a cause-and-effect map. In science, it might be a cyclical process diagram. When learners map out the text visually, they reduce the cognitive burden of holding multiple facts in their heads. They can see the relationships between ideas.

The teacher introduces a text describing the water cycle and provides an empty cyclical graphic organiser. As the teacher reads the text aloud, they model where to place the first concept. The learners produce a diagram by extracting key terms and placing them in the correct sequential boxes.

‍

​

Strategy 2: Say It Clearly

Research shows structured talk connects reading and writing. Exploratory talk lets learners test academic ideas before writing them down. Casual chat doesn't build subject literacy. Learners need roles and sentence starters for strong conversations (Researchers, date needed).

When we structure oracy, we provide a bridge between reading complex texts and writing formal responses. Learners need to hear themselves using Tier 3 vocabulary. They need to practice forming arguments verbally before writing them down.

The teacher assigns role cards to small groups reading a text on climate change. One learner is the 'Starter', another the 'Builder', and another the 'Challenger'. The learners produce a recorded audio summary of their debate, using sentence stems like "The evidence suggests that..." and "I challenge that conclusion because...".

‍

​

Strategy 3: Build It Logically

Once learners have mapped their thinking and verbalised their ideas, they are ready to write. Writing is the test of disciplinary understanding. Blank pages cause anxiety and lead to poor outcomes. Teachers must provide sentence-level scaffolds that enforce the grammatical rules of the subject.

We need to teach learners how sentences connect to form logical arguments. Using structured writing frames helps learners understand the mechanics of academic writing.

The teacher explains that scientific conclusions require cause and effect structures. They provide the stems "Because...", "But...", and "So..." on the whiteboard. The learners produce three sentences summarising a science experiment, using objective language and causal links without copying from the textbook.

‍

‍

​

‍

Common Literacy Misconceptions

The phrase "every teacher is a teacher of literacy" is misunderstood in secondary schools. It often leads teachers to believe they must teach basic spelling or grammar rules. This is false. You are responsible for the communication rules of your domain.

Science teachers teach scientific literacy. Art teachers teach visual and critical literacy. Generic reading strategies do not work for all subjects. Skimming helps find English quotes, but hinders maths problems (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008).

Maths problems need close reading; every word matters. Teachers often see vocabulary as basic lists. Learners seldom use these lists actively. Vocabulary work requires word analysis (Carlisle, 2000). Practise recall (Kang, 2016) to improve learning.

Teachers stop learners highlighting physics texts (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008). They show learners how to identify variables instead. Learners create tables, sorting the text into variable types. This displays subject literacy.

‍

​

‍

Practical Implementation Guide

Use disciplinary literacy planning. Check texts for language demands. Find Tier 2 words (Beck et al., 2013); 'evaluate' crosses subjects. Identify Tier 3 terms (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2012) like 'mitochondria' (Fang, 2006).

Next, explicitly teach the morphology of these words. Break complex words down into prefixes, roots, and suffixes. This strategy is powerful for learners with SEND. When a learner learns that 'poly' means many, they can decode 'polygon', 'polymer', and 'polytheism' across subjects.

Morphology connects vocabulary better than rote learning. Plan lessons with time for reading challenging texts together. Avoid setting complex reading for homework alone. Model thinking; show learners how you untangle sentences (Carlisle, 2010) or use diagrams (Elleman et al., 2009).

The teacher introduces the word 'democracy'. They write the word on the board and split it into 'demos' (people) and 'kratos' (power). The learners produce a spider diagram linking this root to other words they know, writing a definition for each based on the shared root meaning.

‍

​

‍

Literacy Across Core Subjects

Reading and writing demands shift as learners move between classrooms. Understanding these shifts is vital for secondary teachers. We must make the rules of our subjects visible.

‍

​

Strategy 1: History Literacy

History uses interpretation, bias, and context. No historical text is ever truly neutral. Learners must source, contextualise, and corroborate information. When writing, learners use evidence to make arguments (Wineburg, 1991; Lévesque, 2008; Seixas & Morton, 2013).

Teachers show a poster and diary entry from the same time. Learners use a checklist focusing on authorship and motive. They write a paragraph comparing document reliability, using phrases like "Written with hindsight..."

‍

​

Strategy 2: Science Literacy

Scientific text is dense and objective. It often uses passive voice and nominalisation. Learners reading scientific text must use prose, tables, and diagrams (Shanahan, 2004; Fang, 2006).

The teacher provides a text describing a chemical reaction alongside a blank graph. The teacher reads the text aloud and pauses at key numerical data points. The learners produce a plotted line graph, translating the written prose into a visual data format.

‍

​

Strategy 3: Maths Literacy

Mathematics possesses a high density of meaning per word. A misplaced word changes the calculation and outcome. Everyday words often have dual meanings. Reading in Maths requires precision and a slow pace.

Teachers show a ratio word problem on the board. They read it aloud and circle key words. Learners draw a bar model before writing equations (Stigler & Hiebert, 1999). This aids understanding (Boaler, 2016).

‍

‍

​

‍

Questions About Disciplinary Literacy

Question: How is this different from content-area literacy?

Shanahan and Shanahan (2012) showed generic reading aids all subjects. Disciplinary literacy uses subject experts' methods, they claimed. Experts read poems differently than they read lab reports (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2012).

‍

​

Question: How do I find time to teach reading?

Teaching learners how to read your subject texts is not an add-on. Teaching how to read the text is teaching the subject content. If learners cannot read the material, they cannot access the curriculum.

‍

​

Question: How does this support SEND learners?

Shanahan & Shanahan (2012) state disciplinary literacy shows expert thought processes. It gives useful frameworks and support, lowering cognitive load. This lets learners with SEND concentrate on grasping concepts.

‍

​

Question: Should I stop using general reading strategies?

Duke and Pearson (2002) say comprehension strategies build understanding. Shanahan and Shanahan (2008) highlight the need to move learners toward subject analysis. Generic strategies provide a good start but are not the goal.

‍

​

Question: How do we assess disciplinary literacy?

Evaluate learners' writing and verbal reasoning skills in subject tasks. Learners show historical literacy if they corroborate two sources, (Seixas, 2006; Wineburg, 2001). Assessment can happen as part of typical lessons.

Identify one complex textbook passage you plan to use next week and map out how a subject expert would read it.