By Holly Durham
Walk into almost any middle or high school classroom and you’ll see a familiar scene. A student is asked to read silently. By the third sentence, their attention has already begun to drift. Their eyes move, but not always in order. They skip lines, glance up, look back down, and eventually arrive at the end of the paragraph.
When asked what the paragraph means, they aren’t sure.
In another classroom, students are asked to analyze a passage. They are bent over their desks, staring at the text and waiting for the “right” answer to just emerge. Some highlight everything, some nothing, and some simply popcorn words or symbols in the margins: symbol, ?, onomatopoeia, *, diction. When it’s time to analyze, though, many struggle to know where to begin.
These moments may look different on the surface, but they share the same root issue. Students are being asked to analyze texts they have not yet had the chance to fully enter.
The Attention Problem We Can’t Ignore
Across classrooms, it is increasingly common to see students skim instead of read, search instead of think, and move quickly through text without following how ideas connect. This is not simply a motivation issue. It is a cognitive one.
Researchers like Maryanne Wolf have warned that “skim reading is the new normal,” as digital environments train our brains to move quickly across text rather than dwell in it. Nicholas Carr similarly describes a shift from deep reading to “skimming across the surface.” Over time, students become more comfortable with speed than with sustained focus. This isn’t laziness, but an adaptation to their digital world.
The result shows up in classrooms every day. Students read in bursts. And when reading happens in bursts, thinking does too.
This matters because comprehension and analysis depend on the ability to hold ideas in mind long enough to connect them. If students cannot sustain attention across sentences and paragraphs, they cannot follow an argument, track a shift in meaning, or build an interpretation.
The Instructional Gap: Where We Start Matters
At the same time, we often introduce analysis at a highly abstract level.
We ask students:
- What is the theme?
- What is the author’s tone?
- What is the purpose?
While these questions make sense to us as educators, they assume students already have a clear grasp of the text. For many students, especially those whose attention is already quite fragile, these questions ask them to interpret a text when they’re still trying to figure out what it says.
Without a clear entry point, students either freeze, fall back on formulaic responses, or turn to AI to do the thinking for them. They may complete the task, but the thinking behind it is often shallow, disconnected, or absent.
When we combine these two realities, the challenge becomes clear. Students are being asked to think deeply before they have had the time or structure to stay with a text long enough to understand it.
A Different Way In: Start with What Students Can See
If attention is a prerequisite for comprehension, and comprehension is a prerequisite for analysis, then we need to rethink how students enter a text.
One shift that has proven powerful is to begin not with abstract ideas, but with something concrete and visible: the author’s language.
Students don’t begin by trying to label “theme” or “tone.” They start by noticing conventions authors use – things like active verbs, punctuation choices, or prepositional phases. These are things they can point to, discuss, and question.
To counteract this ‘flickering’ attention, students need a structured way to anchor themselves. This is where the Invitational Process begins, not with abstract analysis, but with a series of deliberate, sequential steps designed to build stamina and focus:
- Read and reread with a specific lens
- Notice a single convention
- Question how and why it is used
- Connect that observation to larger ideas
- Explain their thinking in discussion and writing
This approach does not lower expectations. It simply gives students a place to begin.
Putting it into Practice: The Giver
Imagine a seventh-grade classroom midway through a unit on point of view leading to theme. Students are reading an excerpt from The Giver. Instead of starting with a big question – “What’s the author’s message?” or “How is Jonas characterized?”– they begin with something smaller and more visible: the verbs.
Together, the class Reads (and Rereads) the first few pages of the novel. Here they draw on what they know and use a simple comprehension strategy, such as the GIST strategy. Time is not spent poring over every word, but time is spent getting the gist of the passage. They also start to note what the author is doing. Is the author describing setting? Does this give me information about a character?
Next, they zoom in on Lois Lowry’s use of active verbs like thought, felt, squinting, began, noticed, churned, and trembled. In this invitation, they Question the text. By questioning the actions within the text, students move from seeing what is there to investigating how the text is moving. Students ask:
- Why these verbs?
- What’s different about them?
- What do they show us about Jonas’s experience?
Some students notice how the verbs trace Jonas’s shift from thinking and noticing, to reacting physically and emotionally; others point out how they show his growing uncertainty as he tries to make sense of something unexpected.
Next, they Connect their reading and observations about the verbs to larger ideas such as character, theme, and setting. Through guided discussion, students expand their understanding using speaking stems tied directly to the passage. Instead of generic stems like The character changes when…, students use text-specific stems such as Jonas’s verbs shift from thought and felt to churned and trembled because…
They then Explain their thinking by using a stem or idea from their Invitation to Connect and use text evidence that supports their thinking.
Finally, they Communicate their ideas by ensuring they have used thoughtful verbs in their theme statements and explanations. Then they pair up to share and refine their statements.
Students begin to connect their observations to larger ideas about character and theme. When they write, they are no longer guessing. They are building from something they have seen, discussed, and understood.
Perhaps most importantly, they have stayed with the text long enough for meaning to emerge.
Why This Works
This shift works because it supports attention as well as analysis.
When students focus on one concrete element, the cognitive load is reduced. They are not trying to juggle multiple abstract ideas at once. Rereading becomes purposeful instead of repetitive. Discussion becomes grounded instead of speculative.
Over time, these small shifts build stamina. Students become more comfortable staying with a text, revisiting it, and thinking through it. Attention is no longer something we hope for. It is something we intentionally develop.
Try This in Your Classroom
If you are looking to make this shift, start small. Here are a few simple ways to begin:
- Start with a short excerpt. Ask students to focus on a single element such as verbs, punctuation, or repetition rather than multiple questions at once.
- Build in rereading time. Have students return to the text and annotate on paper. Give them a few quiet minutes to read again before discussion.
- Ask one focused question. Replace broad prompts with something specific and observable. (For example: How do the prepositional phrases help create the setting?)
- Use discussion to build thinking. Let students test ideas out loud before asking them to write.
These moves do not require a new program or additional materials. They are small shifts that can have a significant impact on how students engage with text.
A Final Thought
The challenge in today’s classrooms is not only whether students can read. It is whether they can stay with an idea long enough to understand it.
When we slow down the entry into a text and give students a clear place to begin, analysis becomes less about guessing and more about thinking. Students who once felt unsure begin to participate more fully. They ask better questions. They make stronger connections. And they begin to see themselves as capable readers and thinkers.
If we want students to analyze deeply, we have to first help them attend deeply. When we do, everything that follows becomes possible.
You can find more about the Invitational process in my book Patterns of Analysis: Connecting the Conventions of Grammar to Analytical Reading and Writing. Also take a look at my Patterns of Analysis Process Chart.
Resources
Feature image: Unsplash+
Holly Durham retired from K–12 schools in the summer of 2025, after a 30+ year career in public education as an English teacher, instructional coach, and district leader, She is the author of Patterns of Analysis (6–12): Connecting the Conventions of Grammar to Analytical Reading and Writing (Routledge, 2026), co-author of Patterns of Power for High School, and continues to work closely with educators to strengthen literacy and instruction.
Holly now serves as the Executive Director of K–12 at Children at Risk, where she leads efforts focused on advocacy and support to ensure students living in poverty across Texas have access to strong schools and pathways to a healthy, safe, and economically stable future. She lives and works in Houston, TX.
