Current Issues in Education, 25(2) 

 
 
           Volume 25, Issue 2               November 22, 2024          ISSN 1099-839X 

 

Text Sets: A Comprehensive Analysis of the Literature 

Greta G. Freeman 

University of South Carolina, Upstate 

 

Brooke L. Hardin 

University of South Carolina, Upstate 

 

 

Abstract: Text sets (also referred to as linked text sets, multimodal texts, thematic texts, multi texts, 

focus units, reading across texts, and paired readings or sets) are utilized in classrooms to promote 

reading, learning, and understanding of multiple perspectives. There has not been a thorough 

analysis of studies on text sets or on the wide-ranging effects of text sets. The purpose of this 

review was to conduct a comprehensive analysis of text sets and their effects on student 

achievement and growth. Several writings describing text sets and their development, as well as 

experimental studies reporting on the effects of text sets, were identified through a thorough 

database search. Findings from this review reveal that there are over 100 peer-reviewed journal 

articles, books, book chapters and theses related to text sets. There is evidence to support the use 

of text sets for helping young children to college age students gain multiple perspectives on a topic, 

become highly engaged and motivated, and improve critical thinking, comprehension, content 

knowledge, and social emotional skills. 

 

Keywords: text sets, paired texts, multimodal, interdisciplinary, intertextual 

 

Citation: Freeman, G. G., & Hardin, B. L. (2024). Text sets: A comprehensive analysis of the 

literature. Current Issues in Education, 25(2). https://doi.org/10.14507/cie.vol25iss2.2122  

 

Accepted: 04/03/2024

Text Sets: A Comprehensive Analysis of the Literature 

Instructional strategies are the techniques or methods that a teacher utilizes to meet the 

learning objectives of a lesson or unit-of-study. One such instructional strategy, known as text 

sets, are a purposeful and differentiated collection of resources (print, non-print, classic, 

contemporary, fiction, nonfiction) gathered on a topic, theme, essential question, or core 

conceptual (abstract) idea (Donham, 2013; Giorgis & Johnson, 2002; Kern, 2014; Moss, 2011; 

Young & Ward, 2010). The use of text sets in K-16 classrooms is considered an interdisciplinary 

instructional strategy, spanning multiple time periods and genres. Text sets offer choice, variety, 

https://doi.org/10.14507/cie.vol25iss2.2122


Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          2 

and multiple perspectives on a topic, allowing students to “read, learn, synthesize and deeply 

understand information” (Beck, 2014, p. 13).  

Text set collections are often created by teachers (Elish-Piper et al., 2014) and employed 

in early childhood, elementary and middle school classrooms (Mathis, 2002; Souto-Manning, 

2015). There is also evidence (Fernandez, 2000; Hynd, 1999; Porter, 2018; Tunnell, 1996; 

Twichell, 2018) of the benefits the use of multiple text sets provides at the high school and 

college level. McGlynn and Kelly (2019) state that “if students aren’t invested in what they read, 

they won’t remember it” (p. 36), however many classrooms continue to utilize the one-text 

model where students rely on a single textbook for information related to the subject area.  

There is a substantial body of literature related to text sets. Books, journal articles, 

websites, blogs, and marketplaces, in addition to publishing, educational, and media companies, 

boast the effectiveness of text sets in increasing student interest and engagement, enhancing 

student achievement, and developing interdisciplinary skills. While Barzilai, Zohar, and Mor-

Hagani (2018) and Reynolds (2022) provide valuable yet limited reviews of the literature, they 

recommend future, more widespread research, and reviews. Barzilai, Zohar, and Mor-Hagani 

(2018) specifically discuss the need for a comprehensive review of text sets and the diversity of 

terms depicting the concept. This group of researchers also suggest a review of the literature 

based on age group, discipline, and duration of unit of studies is necessary. Other important 

aspects of text sets underexplored in the literature include understanding assumptions behind 

models of text set construction (Reynolds, 2022), the need to understand how text sets support 

comprehension of challenging texts to build background knowledge (Lupo et al., 2017), and the 

relationships between text sets, instructional approaches, student learning, and feelings of teacher 

efficacy (Salerno et al., 2020).  

Given the identified gaps and lack of a general review of the literature, an investigative 

review is necessary to present overarching themes, provide a comprehensive understanding of 

what is known and has been published, and guide future studies related to text sets. Considering 

the numerous pedagogical benefits of text sets, it is important to provide a review of the related 

information for those interested in learning about or utilizing this concept, or who are 

contemplating furthering the research on the topic. Therefore, the aim of this investigative 

review is to determine the scope of the information related to text sets available in the literature, 

and to document and merge that information into a single, pragmatic record. This comprehensive 

and systematic review of the literature and repository of core ideas and examples crystallizes the 

many instructional benefits of text sets and supplies a centralized review for those interested in 

this pedagogical phenomenon.  

Accordingly, we reviewed over 50 years of literature (1970-2023), on text set history and 

instructional use in K-16 educational settings. This systematic analysis reports key terms, 

descriptions, instructional design and application, empirical studies, and informational texts, as 

well as the overall effectiveness of text sets on student achievement and engagement. The 

following research questions guided the review: 

 

1. What are the trends in publications and research related to text sets? 

2. What themes emerge in a review of the literature of text sets and related terminology? 

3. How has the concept of text sets as an instructional strategy evolved over time? 

4. What effects does the use of text sets as an instructional strategy have in K16 education? 

 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          3 

Below we will offer background information by providing a historical and theoretical overview 

of text sets. 

Historical Foundations 

There is a wide array of terminology and descriptions surrounding the value of 

referencing one text versus a text set philosophy. An understanding of the historical 

underpinnings of texts and education can bring light to the decades-long discussion and 

evolution of the text set phenomenon. Reviewing this historical evolution of multi- and varied 

texts on a topic supports background knowledge and appreciation for the characteristics and 

themes presented in the results portion of the review.  

Although formal education in the United States did not begin until the 1800s (Urban et 

al., 2008), information provided to children or students began earlier, by tutor, instructor, or 

parent. Eventually instructors used a sanctioned text in the 1700s and 1800s (called schoolbooks) 

in the form of the New England Primer and Webster’s blue-backed speller (Wakefield, 1998). In 

the early years of formal education, written documents and texts were limited due to the lack of 

printing materials and machines available. Even after the printing press made such an impact, 

classrooms continued to utilize the single-text method for convenience (Hartman & Hartman, 

1994). 

The specific idea of multi-text classrooms, based on a topic or theme follows the 

initiatives put forth by progressive educators beginning in the 1930s, and goes back decades in 

academic literature (Harste et al., 1988). At the time, progressives argued that students were not 

seeing the full scope of a topic through a single text and encouraged the reading of several texts 

on a topic (Hatfield, 1935; Weeks, 1936). In a new English curriculum document (Hatfield, 

1935), evidence emerged for an out-with-the-old, authoritarian style of teaching, and in-with-a-

new experiential, imaginative, and connection-to-self and world ideal. Encountering a variety of 

texts on a topic to obtain multiple perspectives was one of the new teaching strategies promoted 

in the curricula. With a lack of resources, technology, and money, however, this idea soon faded, 

and the notion of the lone text continued to be the norm.  

The multi-text teaching strategy was reimagined by Herber (1970) who discussed using a 

main text, supported by multiple interdisciplinary or subsidiary texts to promote a topic. The 

idea, however, fell short due to similar issues educators faced in the 1930s. Money for education 

was scarce and widespread computer technology was not yet on the horizon for educational 

institutions. In the 1990s the phrase “text set” began to take hold in the literacy classroom and 

the literature (Hamman, 1994; Hartman & Hartman, 1993), and the idea has intermittently 

alternated between trendy and antiquated over the past three decades.  

Prior to and immediately after the turn of the 21st century, when text sets were gaining 

popularity, authors such as Opitz (1998), explained text sets as “collections of books related to a 

common element or topic” (p. 622). In 1990, Taberski wrote about a simple form of text set or 

paired text, where the teacher utilized one fiction and one non-fiction book read aloud together. 

Lewis and Walpole (2016), through a “four-text framework” (p. 34), suggested choosing texts 

for background knowledge and interest, information, content knowledge, and increased topic 

understanding. 

Over twenty years into the 21st century the term text no longer refers to a single, written 

work (especially in reference to an academic textbook). Authors such as Rowe (1987), are finally 

seeing their multi-text notion realized, that texts are not only print sources [linguistic], but any 

source that communicates meaning [semiotic] (Giorgis & Johnson, 2002; Hartman & Hartman, 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          4 

1993, 1995). Nichols (2009) states that “text should no longer conjure an image of traditional 

books neatly lining library shelves” (p. 34). It should move beyond a single book, and even 

beyond printed words on a page.  

Texts in this context can include all or some of the following: books (including 

textbooks, picture books, reference books, narrative expository texts, explanation texts, how-to 

books, chapter books and novels); biographies and journals; field-guides; cartoons (including 

political); poems and song lyrics; documentaries, interviews, diaries, news footage or articles; 

public service announcements and propaganda; photographs, brochures, postcards, and timelines; 

artistic works such as film, performances, theatrical pieces, paintings, pictures, galleries and 

exhibits; digital texts such as webcasts, live feeds, podcasts, blogs, tweets, videos, and social 

media posts; field trips (in person and virtual); graphic organizers including charts, maps and 

graphs; data; digital essays; artifacts; and personal experiences (Balkus, 2019; Dunkerly-Bean & 

Bean, 2015; Ivey, 2002; Kern, 2014; Pytash et al., 2014; Tracy et al., 2016).  

Today’s text sets contain a rich and complex main text, often called a launch text 

(Nichols, 2009), springboard text (Dunkerly-Bean & Bean, 2015), or anchor text (Folk & 

Palmer, 2016). The anchor text is supported by subsidiary or elaboration texts (Folk & Palmer, 

2016), also known as a document or information source (Barzilai, Zohar & Mor-Hagani, 2018). 

Lewis and Walpole (2016) call these subsidiary texts, “knowledge builders” (p. 34), because they 

may also include instructional strategies, literacy lessons, or responses to the text set. Subsidiary 

texts provide scaffolds that support vocabulary and comprehension of the main text (Folk & 

Palmer, 2016). Supplementary texts should be “of high interest, short and accessible” (Pytash et 

al., 2014, p. 54), and support a “methodical order” (Babino et al., 2019, p. 50). Giorgis and 

Johnson (2002) add the texts should be varied in “genre, readability and content” (p. 200).  

Theoretical Foundations 

As with important historical information regarding text set evolution, reviewing the 

theory behind the phenomena moves the discussion forward, and supports the literature analysis. 

There are several theoretical frameworks that support the development and use of text sets in K-

16 classrooms. Freire (1970, 1995) wrote about giving students input and looking beyond the 

text to see power structures and voices. He believed humans should learn to read the world with 

a critical eye and challenge the single story. Freire’s critical theory and critical pedagogy 

supports text sets, as the reader senses a broad view of a topic that spans culture, geography, and 

universal issues. Bishop’s (1990) theory of mirrors, windows and sliding glass doors, also 

challenged the single story through the belief that employing a variety of texts allows the reader 

to not only view the lives of others through text, but to see ourselves in context (Tschida et al., 

2014). Adichie (2009) expanded on the theories of Freire and Bishop with his “danger of the 

single story” presentation. He is quite direct in the belief that we must take information from a 

variety of sources to understand the different voices, perspectives and opinions.  

Wineburg’s (1991) theoretical framework of historical reasoning involved the reading of 

several documents by historians to learn about, determine discrepancies, and identify similarities 

written about a topic. He discussed three methods in his structure including corroboration 

(comparing and contrasting documents), sourcing, and contextualization. This framework 

supports the idea of intertextuality, or “the process of making connections between other texts to 

facilitate the construction of meaning of new texts” (Pytash et al., 2014, p. 54). Kristeva coined 

the term and developed the theory of intertextuality (Zengin, 2016). Shanahan’s (2013) cognitive 

flexibility theory and intertextual model complements Kristeva’s (1980) theory of intertextuality 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          5 

as support for multiple text use, where individuals understand information best through multiple 

representations. 

Methods 

Following the recommendations of Mertens (2023) this study adhered to a systematic 

review approach to gain insights into the concept of text set history, background information, and 

effects on student engagement and academic achievement through empirical research and 

practical instructional applications. An initial preliminary source search of EBSCO Host and 

World Wide Web (WWW) sites using the keywords text sets, reading, interdisciplinary, and 

multiple texts determined that there is much literature on the topic. Based on abstract 

examinations, it was found that none of the works initially reviewed included a complete review 

of the literature and many were missing important historical resources and material.  

The initial search led to over 300 resources that were screened by the authors 

independently and collectively. From this initial screening, inclusion and exclusion criteria were 

established to determine the next steps. It was decided that the final collection must include the 

term “text set” or a related term such as multimodal texts. All peer-reviewed publications were 

included. Non-peer-reviewed writings (e.g., articles, books, book chapters, theses, dissertations) 

that integrated instructional strategies and sample text sets, were also incorporated due to the 

practical application contribution. Blogs, magazine articles, teacher resource sites and opinion 

reviews were removed from the final list due to lack of academic rigor, time constraint, and 

relevance to the study purpose and research questions.  

After the initial review, a new search was performed to include additional search terms 

ascertained from prior search publications (e.g., multimodal texts, paired texts, twin texts, and 

intertextual) and search databases (i.e., EBSCO Host Education, ERIC, Education Index 

Retrospective, Research Gate, Google Scholar, Academic Search Ultimate, Academic Search 

Premier, and ProQuest—including Dissertation Abstracts International). Reference lists from the 

first set of publications were evaluated to add to the updated library for more thorough review. 

The final review of the literature on text sets brought forth over 100 written works, of which 

were given an in-depth reading, and organized and evaluated using Zotero, a reference 

management software.  

The screening process is illustrated in Figure 1. A notes editor through the Zotero 

software allowed for consolidation of themes, points of interest, direct quotation consensus, and 

metadata. Themes were identified, listed and color-coded in the note’s column of the software. 

The authors worked independently via digital means, and met weekly for several months 

to organize, discuss, and evaluate the information. Prior to the final draft of the paper, themes 

were again evaluated. Some less obvious strands were folded into more prominent themes while 

others were deleted altogether to be discussed later in the recommendations section.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          6 

Figure 1  

Screening Process 

Results and Analysis 

The results from this systematic review present information gathered from a total of 110 

sources: seven books, 33 book chapters, 62 peer-reviewed journal articles, four master’s theses, 

two dissertations and two technical reports. Although there are hundreds of websites, blogs, and 

other online depictions of text sets, only published, peer-reviewed and edited sources are 

discussed in this context. Of the reviewed works, the following terminologies were discovered 

and interchangeable, as a means to describe a set of texts to teach a topic or theme: text sets, 

multiple texts or intertextual integration (Barzilai, Zohar, & Mor-Hagani, 2018; Lenski, 1998); 

multimodal multi-genre texts (Cappiello & Dawes, 2013); paired texts, readings or sets, or twin 

books (Gao & Bintz, 2015; Taberski, 1990); tri-texts (Ciecierski & Bintz, 2017); quad texts 

(Lewis & Walpole, 2016; Lupo et al., 2017); alternative texts, conceptual text sets, thematic text 

sets (Ivey, 2002; Tschida & Buchanan, 2015); personal text sets, generative text sets (Mathis & 

Giorgis, 1999; Souto-Manning, 2015); reading across texts (Hartman & Hartman, 1993); and 

multiple perspectives, reading ladders or multimodal text scaffolds (Witte & Rybakova, 2017). 

The phrase “text set” is applied throughout the results section to represent the comprehensive 

understanding of the concept exemplified by the previous terms and phrases. The concept of 

intertextuality, the belief that no text ever stands alone, or that every text is connected to another 

text, was the overarching idea that ran constant throughout the literature. 

Thematic Arrangement 

It is important to determine major themes found in a literature review to support a study’s 

purpose and categorize the information for quick reference. Through thematic coding, an 

analysis of the scholarly literature available on text sets brought forth several interrelated 

characteristics of text set information. These themes will support readers in a concise search for 

Initial Review 

EBSCO Host, WWW - “Text Sets” = Preliminary Sources (323) 

Final Review 

EBSCO Host Education, ERIC, Education Index Retrospective, Research Gate, Google Scholar, 

Academic Search Ultimate, Academic Search Premier, and ProQuest—including Dissertation Abstracts 

International - “Text Sets” or Equivalent Terminology = Peer-Reviewed or Edited Sources (110) 

INCLUDED        EXCLUDED 

Peer Reviewed Sources    Non Peer-Reviewed Sources 

Articles      Blogs     

Book Chapters     Magazines    

Books      Teacher Resource sites   

Non Peer-Reviewed Sources    Websites 

 Articles      Opinion reviews 

Books          

 Book Chapters         

 Theses           

Dissertations           

 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          7 

specific information in a sufficient manner. The specific themes will also address gaps in the 

literature and guide future research.  

All of the reviewed works had some type of definition or description of text sets. 

Eighteen percent of the representative works shared background information including historical 

evidence and/or theoretical foundations. Eighty-eight percent of the readings shared the value for 

utilizing text sets in a classroom setting (categorized by student engagement, motivation, literacy 

and reading comprehension, benefits of multiple perspectives, critical thinking, and social 

emotional support). Seventy-four percent presented instructions for developing text sets, and 

approximately twenty-five percent of the works included full examples of text sets. The final 

review revealed the following key themes: background information (provided in the introduction 

of this paper for reader orientation and context); student engagement and motivation; literacy and 

reading comprehension; multiple perspectives and critical thinking; social emotional support; 

guidelines for development; and sample educator and student created text sets. Each theme is 

presented in an autonomous section, followed by a short discussion and analysis. 

Student Engagement and Motivation 

Text sets have been used for several decades to support student engagement and 

motivation of reading as well as to encourage excitement for content (McGlynn & Kelly, 2019; 

Monobe & Turner, 2018; Tovani, 2004). When students have a choice, and see themselves in the 

text, they are motivated to continue the discovery. Students are engaged and motivated when 

they are interested and see relevance in a topic or see the ability to transfer information to their 

own lives. Single textbook reading has been reported by students and teachers as “too difficult, 

too boring or both” (Ivey, 2002, p. 20) as well as “too broad and prescriptive” (Lent, 2012, p. 

146) and “not student friendly” (McGlynn & Kelly, 2019, p. 37). They have also been said to be 

encyclopedic (Haley, 2016), mundane, and disconnected from events they portray (VanSledright 

& Kelly, 1998).  

Beck (2014) claims that “readers must be able to understand and process what they are 

reading” (p. 12). If this becomes difficult or the texts are boring, there will be a lack of 

motivation and engagement. Text sets support motivation and engagement in high school 

English courses, while students read a book from the Canon along with more engaging 

supplementary texts (Wold & Elish-Piper, 2009). Witte and Rybakova (2017) never use the term 

text set, however, describe the same concept under a different name - reading ladders or 

multimodal text scaffolds. They use the concept of text sets but utilize the required canonical 

texts supplemented with contemporary texts related to a theme. When students encounter an 

interesting text that is on their reading level, it may encourage them to read more difficult texts 

on the topic. Ward and Young (2008) believe teachers should include a range of levels in a text 

collection so that students can experience a variety of topics and themes, making research and 

reading more engaging and rewarding. 

Textbooks provide basic information. They often fail to engage students on a deeper level 

and make connections to their lives. Text sets support student engagement through reading levels 

(Giorgis & Johnson, 2002), relatability (Haley, 2016), and multiple genres and complexities 

(McGlynn & Kelly, 2019). Coombs and Bellingham (2015) share a set of ideas for having 

students engage in text set development and usage. They share that when authentic texts through 

text sets are discovered, students ask and answer tough questions, and improve their knowledge 

of a topic. They also learn how to honor differences (Benner, 2018; Clark-Alexander, 2018; 

Dimitriadou et al., 2011; Fleischaker, 2018; Kelewae, 2018; Lacina & Griffith, 2020), increase 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          8 

background knowledge (Leland & Harste, 1994), make connections to their own lives, and 

improve reading, writing and collaborative skills. Hawkinson and Freedman (2012) support this 

in their statement that “background knowledge increases” with exposure to “far ranging visuals 

and concepts” included in text sets (p. 2).  

All students deserve to be in classrooms that are interesting, relatable, and engaging. 

Oftentimes students who are non-English speakers or bilingual, are in classrooms where they fail 

to see and read about people like themselves. A feeling of disconnect may contribute to a lack of 

engagement. Through text sets students are able to learn about the world, rather than only 

gaining information about local communities. Researchers (Anokhin, 2018; Bintz, 2018; Bintz et 

al., 2018; Culp, 2018; Dowdy & Fleischaker, 2018; McCaffrey & Corapi, 2017; Scullin, 2018; 

Tan, 2018; Werner, 2018) report that multicultural and global text sets motivate and engage 

students because they are able to see a variety of cultures, settings, genres and formats from 

around the globe.  

Babino (2019) believes that through text sets, multilingual students are able to see 

themselves and connect with the literature. Creating captivating text sets that allow students to 

employ “their entire linguistic repertoire is a practice in social reflexivity for educators” (Babino, 

2019, p. 48). Young (2018) communicates an example of this type of connection when she 

shares how a kindergarten student connected to a book because she saw herself and her family in 

the images of the book characters. This supports and builds on Bishop’s (1990) mirrors, windows 

and sliding glass doors theory where students see themselves in texts (mirrors), the lives of 

others in texts (windows), and have the ability to walk through real life into the imaginary 

(sliding glass doors).  

 Students are engaged if they can relate to what they are reading. Tracy et al. (2016), 

discuss the importance of diversity of interests and texts to promote student engagement. Older 

students, as well as young people of various ages, are not always readers. Text sets support these 

students and increase their reading habits. Elish-Piper et al. (2014), believe that text sets “help 

high school students choose to read” (p. 573). Other authors (Borgerding, 2018; Foraker, 2018; 

Hair & Fleischaker, 2018; Krasniqu, 2018; Lee, 2018) support a multicultural, multidisciplinary 

set of texts to learn about self and others. With such a large amount of literature boasting the 

benefits of text sets on student engagement and motivation, it is deduced that text sets should be 

a fundamental and core instructional strategy in K-16 education. 

Literacy and Reading Comprehension Skills 

Literacy skills such as print and phonological awareness, vocabulary, and writing, 

support student’s grasp of important concepts, allow for critical thinking as well as fluent and 

comprehensive communication, and permit students to gain a deeper understanding of their 

world. Research (Babino, 2019; Balkus, 2019; Cervetti et al., 2016; Folk & Palmer, 2016; Tracy 

et al., 2016; Strop & Carlson, 2010) has found that text sets support literacy skills and provide 

choice. Guthrie and Wigfield (2000) demonstrate that choice increases motivation, which in turn 

enhances literacy knowledge (Gambrell & Morrow, 1996). Lieberman and Looney (2013) found 

that when text sets are selected and implemented carefully, they strengthen literacy development. 

The use of text sets is a multimodal strategy, referring to definition, and literacy experts 

and researchers provide a rationale for their use in classroom settings to support integration 

among content areas (Balkus, 2019; Barzilai, Zohar, & Mor-Hagani, 2018; Batchelor, 2017). 

Balkus (2019) demonstrated cross curricular teaching in her research thesis by utilizing text sets 

to connect literacy and social studies. Multimodal texts vary meaning through words, illustration, 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          9 

design, genre, readability and content and provide a range of perspectives for the reader (Balkus, 

2019). Batchelor (2017) believes that “without this synergy and interaction, a true understanding 

of the reading would be incomplete” (p. 15). 

Students who struggle with reading and learning often have difficulty with single-text, 

one-size-fits-all instructional practices (Beck, 2014). Teachers who utilize the single-text model 

may leave some readers behind due to reading level and lack of personal connection. All students 

are individuals with different background knowledge and expectations. Text sets reinforce 

concepts (McCaffrey & Corapi, 2017); support acquiring background knowledge for new 

concepts (Ciecierski & Bintz, 2017); and make content accessible to all students (Lent, 2012). 

By adding to the schema of children, text sets support students with or without prior knowledge 

about a topic (Soalt, 2005). Wold et al. (2010), believe that linked text sets provide students with 

distinguishable reading opportunities because in selecting texts all reading levels are recognized 

and students with different backgrounds and knowledge can find success. 

It is important in any 21st century classroom to have a variety of texts for different 

reading levels and in different languages. Lupo et al. (2017) believe a variety of reading levels in 

text sets are important so that students can have a mix of difficulty in their reading, and 

struggling readers and English learners are supported in the process. Ogle and Correa-Kovtun 

(2010) share the importance of repeatedly encountering content-specific terms (as would take 

place through text sets) to support building vocabulary. Fernandez (2000) discusses the 

importance of text sets for English language learners, and state that a combination of prior 

knowledge on a topic together with new knowledge gained from text sets will “activate their 

reading schemata and aid their comprehension” (p. 743). 

Students may read words fluently, but they may not always understand what they are 

reading. Researchers (Babino, 2019; Balkus, 2019; Cervetti et al., 2016; Ciecierski & Bintz, 

2017; Lieberman & Looney, 2013) have found that text sets support the building of 

comprehension skills and background knowledge. In order to enjoy what is read and make 

connections, students must have good comprehension skills. When a student is comprehending 

what they are reading, they are understanding the meaning and merging it with what they already 

know and understand. Soalt (2005) found that background knowledge and vocabulary can 

improve comprehension skills, especially if explored in a variety of contexts such as through text 

sets. 

Teachers often search for new ways to help students comprehend what they read. Ivey 

(2002) suggested different reading materials to build comprehension and interest. Cervetti et al. 

(2016) determined that focusing text sets on concepts improved student comprehension, 

knowledge and vocabulary, and Batchelor (2017), agreed that through text sets reading 

comprehension is improved and history comes to life.  

Standards-based teaching and high stakes accountability measures is a paradigm shift in 

K-12 education beginning in the 1980s and, although under constant debate, remains a fixture in 

schools across the globe. When educators develop new instructional strategies or ideas, they 

often link them to state and national academic standards. Balkus (2019) speaks of the changes 

that came with the implementation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). With these 

new standards came stricter requirements to integrate content areas such as social studies and 

literacy, and text sets make it easier to integrate subject areas. A large number of works reviewed 

explicitly refer to specific standards such as the ILA/NCTE, and CCSS (Donham, 2013; Finley, 

2015). If text sets support literacy and reading comprehension, as the literature has defined, 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          10 

utilizing this instructional strategy regularly could possibly lead to higher academic achievement 

and test scores. 

Multiple Perspectives and Critical Thinking 

Using one text to tell a story or learn a concept in history or other area of social science 

often only provides one perspective which can lead to stereotypes and a lack of character’s voice. 

It can also turn students off reading when they fail to see different perspectives or make 

connections to their own lives. Hartman and Hartman (1993), state “Just as a camera lens 

magnifies details to the point of blurring the background, so can one text be magnified to the 

point where its context becomes a blur” (p. 110).  

Crawford and Zygouris-Coe (2008) share the importance of students learning about 

“complex issues” (p. 199) and hearing different perspectives from multiple texts. When students 

start to review several texts on a topic or theme, they are able to witness different interpretations 

and points of view, inconsistent information, and changes over the course of history (McCaffrey, 

2014). Balkus (2019) states, “Each text has made its own decisions about what should be 

included and what should be left out, creating its own interpretations” (p. 32). This helps them to 

evaluate the credibility of a text, determine multiple biases, understand issues, and draw 

reasonable conclusions (Barzilai, Zohar & Mor-Hagani, 2018). They must make an ultimate 

decision on what is the best and most accurate information. As students read and collaborate with 

classmates on a variety of texts related to a topic, they begin to think critically about what might 

be missing from the reading, and identify elements to promote understanding (Brugar, 2015; 

Hynd, 1999; Scales & Tracy, 2017). They also develop questions that “lead to critical inquiry 

processes and engaging class discussions” (Bersh, 2013, p. 49). Barzilai, Zohar and Mor-Hagani 

(2018) describe this as rhetorical transformation, or the production of new text structures that 

connect ideas and transfer to a new dimension. 

Experts in the concept of text sets (Beck, 2014; Elish-Piper et al., 2014; VanSledright & 

Kelly, 1998), have found that using text sets in classrooms support critical or deep thinking, 

problem solving and inquiry. Students utilize critical thinking skills as they integrate knowledge 

and ideas through texts that are based around the same theme. VanSledright and Kelly (1998) 

performed a research study with 5th graders exposed to multiple texts on a topic and determined 

critical thinking skills increased as well as historical understanding. Text sets support deep 

thinking as students read with an inquiry stance, identify with characters, understand difficult 

issues, make discoveries about themselves and others, translate sign systems, and have a general 

understanding of authors purpose and point of view (Elish-Piper et al., 2014; Pytash et al., 2014; 

Nichols, 2009). 

Social Emotional Support 

Collaboration is an important 21st century skill. Students at all levels need 

communication and collaboration to support positive social and emotional behaviors. Opitz 

(1998) supports this by stating that text sets allow students to learn from one another through 

discussion and idea sharing. He states that “text sets cultivate and support a social learning 

environment, an atmosphere where students can think and learn together” (p. 14). 

Young people have always dealt with challenging and even threatening life issues: 

bullying, violence, discrimination, death, politics, sexuality, friendships, physical appearance, 

and an array of other social, emotional, and traumatic issues. Text sets can be developed to 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          11 

support almost any difficult or controversial life issue as well as promote character traits such as 

empathy, perseverance, caring, kindness, understanding, thoughtfulness, honesty, loyalty, 

responsibility, curiosity, bravery, sharing, tolerance, and respect.  

Tschida and Buchanan (2015) promote text sets for supporting controversial issues, or 

“conflicting points of view and longstanding social debates related to a theme, event or 

experience” (p. 43). Text sets should be used by teachers to promote advocacy, support social 

justice issues, and disrupt the single story (Dodge & Crutcher, 2015; Dunkerly-Bean et al., 2014; 

Moran & Keith, 2016). For example, Bersh (2013) shares a text set for discussing bias related to 

immigration. Having a variety of perspectives through a multitude of texts supports marginalized 

students in making connections to their own lives and finding their voice. 

Generative text sets are created based on themes of conflicts and anxieties and are 

“designed for equity and universal access” (Souto-Manning, 2015, p. 80). Text sets allow 

students to feel a sense of belonging and offer a “non-threatening environment from which 

children can explore and resist daily challenges” (Babino et al., p. 45). Martin (2018) suggests 

the use of blues music as a part of a text set to promote understanding. 

 

Guidelines for Development of Text Sets 

 

In the review of the literature, many of the readings share instructions or ideas to support 

teachers and students in the development of text sets (Hartman & Hartman, 1993; Lent, 2012; 

Tschida & Buchanan, 2015). The main goal is to determine a topic or idea and choose an anchor 

text followed by several subsidiary texts. Due to the large number of sources including text set 

development guidelines, the authors felt this should be included as an important theme running 

throughout the literature.  

Tschida and Buchanan (2015) share a four-step process for creating text sets: 1) Identify 

the topic; 2) Recognize multiple perspectives; 3) Locate suitable texts; and 4) Select texts. Once 

texts are chosen, Babino et al. (2019), believe each subsidiary text should be presented in a 

prescribed order to support the topic. Hartman and Hartman (1993) share strategies for arranging 

texts by type and structure. Arranging texts by type focuses on theme, whereas arranging texts by 

structure focuses on the structure between texts. To build on their 1993 strategies, Hartman and 

Hartman (1994) later came up with four questions to support text set development: 1) What types 

of texts can be used? 2) What are ways to arrange texts? 3) In what activities can students 

engage? and, 4) How can outcomes be represented? 

In searching for the types of texts that are available and can be used appropriately in text 

sets, Hoch et al. (2019) believed creators must organize texts based on themes and questions and 

locate sources that are easy-to-challenging. Donham (2013) discussed that texts must include a 

range of complexity, style, or genre. In addition, Lupo et al. (2017) suggested a variety of easy-

to-challenging texts, especially including more interesting ones to help motivate students to 

persevere through the difficult ones. Generative or personal text sets are “generated from the 

interests, tensions and realities of learners” (Souto-Manning, 2015, p. 79). Multimodal, multi-

genre text sets include texts from a variety of sources and genres. Thematic text sets cover a 

topic and span reading levels and genres. Intertextual integration refers to the requiring of 

activation of information read from another text. Paired texts, readings or sets and twin books 

generally utilize two books on a topic, whereas tri-texts include three, and quad texts include 

four texts. Reading ladders or multi-modal text scaffolds focus on a theme and build from one 

text to another framing information along the way. 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          12 

The search for the perfect anchor and subsidiary texts takes time and effort. Fortunately, 

there are hundreds of previously created text sets available online and in books or digital 

libraries. Lent (2012) explains that to create text sets one must begin by determining what 

questions they wish to answer before beginning the search for texts. Hawkinson and Freedman 

(2012) also support asking essential questions before creating text sets. An essential question 

related to civilizations would be related to what elements make a civilization. 

Griffith (2018) coined the phrase “constantly curating” or constantly searching out and 

adding new texts to sets or creating new text sets (p. 39). He explains that as teachers we know 

our topics and are constantly locating resources to add to our teaching toolbox. For example, he 

states, “when a song I’m listening to connects to a book I’m teaching, which makes me think of 

an image that would help tie the two together, I’m curating a potential text set for my students” 

(p. 39). Fernandez (2000) supports Griffith’s concept of constantly curating in that text sets 

should be “defined to be flexible and the addition or subtraction of materials is likely to occur 

over time” (p. 742). 

A variety of authors (Dunkerly-Bean & Bean, 2015; Shanahan, 2003; Tracy et al., 2016) 

provide activities and creation of steps for immediate implementation of text sets. Lupo et al. 

(2019) provide a framework for creating text sets based on motivation, complexity, challenge, 

and comprehensibility.  

There are several projects, and activities shared in the research for how to represent text 

sets and outcomes from their representation. Inquiry, digital learning, writing, collaboration, 

reader’s theater, character maps, biographical sketches, and letter writing (Hoch et al., 2019; 

Smolen et al., 2008) are a few examples provided in the literature. 

 

Educator and Student Created Text Sets 

 

There are complete text sets and activities for all age levels on internet sites and 

published in books and peer-reviewed journal articles. There were over 150 text sets discovered 

in the review of the literature. Themes surrounding the human story (i.e. heroes, family, 

character traits, celebrating differences, rights, identity, and growing up) are highlighted by a 

number of researchers (Bersh, 2013; Coombs & Bellingham, 2015; Dodge & Crutcher, 2015; 

Dunkerly-Bean & Bean, 2015; Elish-Piper et al., 2014; McCaffrey & Corapi, 2017; Nichols, 

2009; Tracy et al., 2016; Ward & Young, 2008; Wold et al., 2010). There are a number of text 

sets based on academic content especially in the social sciences and literacy areas (Batchelor, 

2017; Brugar, 2015; Cappiello & Dawes, 2013; Cappiello & Dawes, 2021; Crawford & Roberts, 

2016; Fernandez, 2000; Folk & Palmer, 2016; Giorgis & Johnson, 2002; Haley, 2016; Kimmel, 

2019; Lendak, 2018; Lent, 2012). Many of the text sets that fit into the content area category 

have a multicultural theme running through them (Kurkjian et al., 2004; Robb, 2002; Rodesiler, 

2017; Smolen et al., 2008; Witte & Rybakova, 2017). Although this article cannot focus on the 

specific elements in each of the text sets discovered in the literature, it is worth knowing there 

are endless resources available for teachers wishing to utilize text sets. 

 

Discussion and Analysis 

 

The results from this comprehensive review of the literature on text sets provide readers 

with over twenty interchangeable terms or phrases depicting a set of texts on a topic or theme 

and used in an educational setting. Findings also include a thorough historical and theoretical 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          13 

foundation in support of the text set phenomenon. A variety of reasons for creating and using 

text sets in a classroom were discovered through this review. With eighty-eight percent of the 

publications reviewed for this article sharing values and rationale for utilizing text sets, it is 

obvious that this is seen as an important instructional strategy. In addition to a thorough 

historical and theoretical foundation, findings include themes alluding to the important outcomes 

from the use of text sets in classrooms to support student learning and growth. Effective text sets 

engage and motivate readers (Balkus, 2019; Giorgis & Johnson, 2002; Lent, 2012); build prior 

knowledge (Balkus, 2019); support comprehension (Beck, 2014; Coombs & Bellingham, 2015); 

improve writing skills (Coombs & Bellingham, 2015); teach vocabulary in context (Balkus, 

2019); allow students to explore a topic in-depth and gain a wide-ranging perspective (Coombs 

& Bellingham, 2015; McGlynn and Kelly, 2019; Tatum et al., 2009); support collaboration 

where students learn from one another and gain new insights (Beck, 2014; Opitz, 1998); support 

all reading levels and struggling readers (Giorgis & Johnson, 2002; Lent, 2012); and deepen 

student thinking on a topic (Balkus, 2019; Beck, 2014). 

It was found through the review of the literature that text sets are appropriate for early 

childhood, elementary, middle, and high school classrooms, as well as two- and four-year 

colleges and universities. Young children benefit from being exposed to multiple texts on a topic. 

In the 21st century young children have an abundance of picture books and other texts to support 

multi-perspective learning. Batchelor (2017) supports the idea of using text sets with young 

children and shares several text sets utilizing picture books. Opitz (1998) describes the 

importance of young children’s exposure to a wide variety of texts, and states that text sets allow 

all children to be exposed to real information at an early age. Older students at the elementary 

level also benefit from text sets. At this age, students are becoming abstract thinkers. Tschida and 

Buchanan (2015), and Ebbers (2002) believe text sets allow for a “historical thinking approach” 

by elementary students (p. 42). Text sets also provide an interdisciplinary approach, for example 

teachers can encourage connections between literacy and science inquiry (Ebbers, 2002).  

Hynd (1999) promotes the use of text sets in middle and high school classrooms to 

encourage students to think like historians. In the high school setting, English teachers must 

teach a required canon (Tatum et al., 2009) which can be challenging when it comes to student 

engagement. However, teachers have utilized text sets as a strategy for keeping the interest of 

students through supplemental, enriching texts, while still teaching the required canon (Witte & 

Rybakova, 2017). Babino et al. (2019) shares strategies for locating “compelling” anchor books 

such as checking out award winners, talking to librarians, and looking at literacy related websites 

and social media accounts. Fernandez (2000) shares text sets for use in a community college 

developmental reading course. She explains that textbooks for community college students may 

be too easy or too difficult, but with text sets she can have a variety of resources related to a 

topic and all students at all levels can be successful in learning the content. 

The idea of text sets as an instructional strategy has recently seen much publication and 

classroom use, based on the increase in technology access, however there are still teachers who 

are hesitant about the text set notion, due to their feelings about time constraints in creating them 

(Doolittle, 2016). Dunkerly-Bean and Bean, (2015) dispute this argument by stating that, “the 

ease with which they can be constructed and utilized has made them much more attractive and 

pragmatic for classroom use for both critical literacy and standards-based purposes” (p. 3). 

Findings from this study demonstrate a large number of pre- designed text sets and guidelines for 

creating text sets, making their construction and classroom utilization less cumbersome for 

teachers. With hundreds of text sets created and available on the Internet, through teacher 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          14 

resource sites and books, there finally seems to be a real paradigm shift taking place, moving 

away from the single text paradigm (Hartman & Hartman, 1994) to the multi-text, multi-genre 

text set paradigm. Today the concept is widely known in the education community and is a staple 

in many K16 classrooms. 

 

Conclusions and Recommendations 

 

The idea of text sets has been around for decades, but only since the ease of access with 

technology has the concept been able to move forward in production and implementation. The 

peer-reviewed literature and research available on text sets show they are valuable for supporting 

multiple perspectives, as well as literacy, comprehension, collaboration, and content skills. Much 

of the literature has ready-made text sets for use in K-16 classrooms. Several of the articles 

reviewed are older and a large number of resources have been developed or published since the 

time of publication, however with additions of more current texts, they can be utilized in modern 

classrooms. Based on the findings of this systematic literature review on text sets, the authors 

envision text sets being used in K16 classrooms and across all content areas to support student 

engagement and motivation, academic achievement, critical thinking, multiple perspectives, and 

social emotional skills.  

Although the authors have completed a thorough review of the available literature, there 

are limitations to this systematic analysis. Search databases are selective about the journals and 

topics they include so there is possibly more information available that has not been included in 

this paper. Time and space are a limitation on the part of the authors and publishers. The authors 

performed a comprehensive review of the literature, however given more time, additional 

publications and categories may have been included. Journals have restrictions on space; 

therefore, a limitation is that some important information could have been left out. New 

information is continually added to websites and publications; therefore, a final limitation is that 

as this paper is published, new literature may become available. 

 

Implications for Future Practice 

 

 This review supports a deeper understanding of the text set phenomena and has initiated a 

valuable collection of information, ideas, plans, and guidelines for practitioners. To optimize text 

set classroom applications, the following recommendations are presented. First, available text 

sets should be identified by grade level(s), and new sets should be planned and developed to 

include missing topics and state standards. The current literature on text sets indicates variety in 

text set creation, arrangement, and implementation. Following the advice of Donham (2013), the 

focus of these newly identified text sets should follow the various components of current sets and 

should be conceptual. Texts should represent dimensions of a topic (for example immigration). 

Dimensions of this topic would include the why and how, as well as the impacts, challenges, 

external characters, and destinations related to the topic of immigration.  

Practitioners could also follow the ideas of Hartman and Hartman (1993) who discussed 

dividing the support texts into categories: companion, complementary, synoptic, disruptive, and 

rereading. Companion texts are by one author; complementary texts are by a variety of authors; 

synoptic texts give different versions of the same idea; disruptive texts give a different outcome 

of an event; and rereading is reviewing the texts a person has already visited.  



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          15 

Finally, with hundreds of text sets available it is recommended that available text sets be 

reviewed, and a repository established for teachers and categorized by grade level and theme or 

topic.  Many educators are not allowed access to scholarly publications that higher education 

students and faculty are given. To obtain the full benefits and variety of available text sets, the 

authors recommend a dissemination of curated research outcomes and practical application 

examples via social media and other digital means to reach a more diverse audience. There are 

multiple curriculum standards, topics and themes that need text sets created for them. Ultimately, 

text sets support teachers and students and will most likely grow in popularity and volume in the 

future. 

 

Implications for Future Studies 

 

 Based on the findings, the authors propose several implications for future research to 

address the limitations of the available literature. The authors agree with Barzilai, Zohar, and 

Mor-Hagani (2018), Reynolds (2022), Lupo et al. (2017) and Salerno et al. (2020), that future, 

specialized studies should be conducted. Specific research should address age group, discipline, 

duration of unit of studies, models of construction and instructional approaches, support of 

challenging concepts, student learning, and feelings of efficacy. It is also suggested for further 

research and review to study connections between text sets and academic achievement or 

assessment results. In addition to McCaffrey’s (2014) findings that the exemplary text sets of the 

Common Core State Standards are not diverse enough to engage all learners the authors believe 

there must be additional text sets created by teachers to supplement the CCSS sets to make sure 

diverse learners are considered. Research related to CCSS, and diverse text sets are 

recommended.  

Last, we advocate for future research curation of text set studies and practical 

applications. This should come from peer-reviewed, non- peer-reviewed and edited literature. It 

may also be beneficial to review and publicize text sets available on websites. Curation will lead 

to diversity of audiences obtaining the information, and more practitioners and researchers 

understanding and using the concept. This could lead to higher academic achievement, test 

scores, and positive social emotional responses. Dissemination through online communication 

channels can help mobilize research on a global scale. Conversations and collaborative efforts 

could move the conversation and important instructional strategy elements to a larger audience.  

Ultimately, our research has unfolded an expansive conversation on the text set 

phenomenon. Text sets as an instructional strategy have value for a variety of educational 

stakeholders including students, teachers, administrators, and curriculum coordinators. The 

conversation should continue to develop so the benefits reach a wider audience. Professional 

development and curriculum materials could further the knowledge and background information 

as well as general understanding of the concept. 

 

References 

Adichie, C. N. (2009, July). The danger of a single story [Video]. TED. 

      http://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story 

Anokhin, I. (2018). Experiential exercises in lingo-cultural diversity. In J. K. Dowdy & R. 

  Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural students (pp. 213- 

 219). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Babino, A., Araujo, J. J., & Maxwell, M. L. (2019). Critical, compelling, and linguistically 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          16 

  scaffolded literature: Implementing text sets multilingually for social justice. Texas 

  Journal of Literacy Education, 7(1), 44-64. 

Balkus, B. C. (2019). Utilizing text sets to teach critical literacy: Bringing literacy into the social 

studies middle school classroom (#309) [Master’s Thesis, Hamline University]. 

https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/hse_cp/309 

Barzilai, S., Zohar, A. R., & Mor-Hagani, S. (2018). Promoting integration of multiple texts: A 

  review of instructional approaches and practices. Education Psychology Review, 30, 973- 

999. 

Batchelor, K. E. (2017). Around the world in 80 picture books: Teaching ancient civilizations 

  through text sets. Middle School Journal, 48(1), 13-26. 

Beck, P. (2014). Multigenre text set integration: Motivating reluctant readers through successful 

  experiences with text. Journal of Reading Education, 40(1), 12-19. 

Benner, L. B. (2018). Communications between the Deaf, the culturally Deaf, their families, and 

  the hearing. In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for 

  multicultural students (pp. 221-228). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Bersh, L. C. (2013). The curricular value of teaching about immigration through picture book 

  thematic text sets. The Social Studies, 104(2), 47-56. 

Bintz, W. P. (2018). Using literature to teach inference in the English/language arts classroom. In 

  J. K.  Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural 

  students (pp. 3-12). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Bintz, W., Moore, S. D., & Mila, R. (2018). Using text sets to teach STEM in the K-5 classroom. 

  In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal Learning for 

  Multicultural Students (pp. 107-115). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense.  

Bishop, R. S. (1990). Mirrors, windows, and sliding glass doors. Perspectives, 6(3), ix-xi. 

Borgerding, L. (2018) A text set guided tour of biological evolution. In J. K. Dowdy & R. 

 Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural students (pp. 85-98). 

 Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Brugar, K. A. (2015). Thinking historically: Promoting content-area reading in history through 

  the use of text sets. New England Journal of History, 72(1), 102-126. 

Cappiello, M. A., & Dawes, E. T. (2013). Teaching with text sets. Huntington Beach, California: 

  Shell Education. 

Cappiello, M. A., & Dawes, E. T. (2021). Text sets in action: Pathways through content area 

  literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Routledge. 

Cervetti, G. N., Wright, T. S., & Hwang, H. (2016). Conceptual coherence, comprehension, and 

  vocabulary acquisition: A knowledge effect? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary 

  Journal, 29(4), 761–779.   

Ciecierski, L. M., & Bintz, W. P. (2017). Tri-texts: A potential next step for paired texts. The 

  Reading Teacher, 71(4), 479-483. doi:10.1002/trtr.1649 

Clark-Alexander, L. (2018). The way of my people: Addressing students’ heritage through 

  Blackfoot culture. In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal 

  learning for multicultural students (pp. 201-209). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Coombs, D., & Bellingham, D. (2015). Using text sets to foster critical inquiry. English Journal, 

  105(2), 88-95.  

Crawford, P. A., & Roberts, S. K. (2016). Connecting words to the world: Literature connections 

  for social studies through text sets. Childhood Education, 92(3), 250-253. 

  DOI: 10.1080/00094056.2016.1180929 

https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/hse_cp/309
https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/hse_cp/309


Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          17 

Crawford, P. A., & Zygouris-Coe, V. (2008). Those were the days: Learning about history 

  through literature. Childhood Education, 84, 197-203. 

Culp, K. (2018). Colors and emotions. In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: 

  Multimodal learning for multicultural students (pp. 263-268). Leiden/Boston: Brill 

  Sense. 

Dimitriadou, C., Tamtelen, E., & Tsakou, E. (2011). Multimodal texts as instructional tools for 

  intercultural education: A case study. Intercultural Education, 22(2), 223-228. 

Dodge, A. M., & Crutcher, P. A. (2015). Inclusive classrooms for LGBTQ students: Using 

  linked text sets to challenge the hegemonic “single story.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult 

  Literacy, 59(1), 95-105. DOI: 10.1002/jaal.433 

Donham, J. (2013). Text sets, deep learning and the Common Core. School Library Monthly, 

  29(6), 5-7.  

Doolittle, B. (2016). Incorporating text sets in the classroom: The benefit for student 

  achievement in all content areas (#1872279559) [Master’s Thesis, Empire State College]. 

  Proquest LLC. 

Dowdy, J. K., & Fleischaker, R. (2018). Text sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural 

students. Brill Sense: Leiden/Boston. 

Dunkerly-Bean, J., & Bean, T. W. (2015). Exploring human rights and cosmopolitan critical 

  literacy with global young adult literature multimodal text sets. New England Reading 

Association Journal, 50(2), 1-7.  

Dunkerly-Bean, J., Bean, T. W., & Alnajjar, K. (2014). Seeking asylum: Adolescents explore the 

  crossroads of human rights education and cosmopolitan critical literacy. Journal of 

  Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(3), 230-241. DOI: 10.1002/jaal.349 

Ebbers, M. (2002). Science text sets: Using various genres to promote literacy and inquiry. 

  Language Arts, 80(1), 40-50. 

Elish-Piper, L., Wold, L. S., & Schwingendorf, K. (2014). Scaffolding high school students’ 

  reading of complex texts using linked text sets. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 

  57(7), 565–574, https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.292. 

Fernandez, J. (2000). Text sets in the adult developmental reading classroom: Expanding literacy 

  through diverse readings. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43(8), 742–746. 

Finley, K. A. (2015). Intertextual Connections in Text Sets: Creating Common Core Curriculum 

  for Middle School Readers (148148886) [Master’s Thesis,Hamline University]. Corpus. 

Fleischaker, R. (2018). Jazzin’ it up in the elementary music classroom with text sets. In Dowdy 

  & Fleischaker Text Sets: Multimodal Learning for Multicultural Students (pp. 239-249). 

 Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense 

Folk, W., & Palmer, T. (2016). Light, color, vision, optics! A text set for grades 6-8. Science 

  Scope, 39(8), 39-44. 

Foraker, B. (2018). Good hair: Exploring race within multicultural preschool curriculum. In J. 

  K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural 

  students (pp. 25-32). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum. 

Freire, P. (1995). Reading the world and reading the word: An interview with Paulo Freire. 

  Language Arts, 62(1), 15-21. 

Gambrell, L. B., & Morrow, L. M. (1996). Creating motivating contexts for literacy learning. In 

  L. Baker, P. Afflerbach, & D. Reinking (Eds.), Developing engaged readers in school 

  and home communities (p. 115–136). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.292


Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          18 

Gao, Y., & Bintz, W. P. (2015). Using picture books as paired texts to teach educational 

  theories. The Clearing House, 88, 146-149. 

Giorgis, C., & Johnson, N. J. (2002), Text sets. The Reading Teacher, 56(2), 200-208. 

Griffith, J. (2018). Constantly curating: Building text sets and pairings in novel study. Voices 

  from the Middle, 26(2), 39-41.  

Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. 

B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, Vol. 3 (p. 

403–422). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 

Hair, T., & Fleischaker, R. (2018). Recognizing African influences in American children’s 

  literature. In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for 

  multicultural students (pp. 33-41). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense.  

Haley, B. M. (2016). Using text sets to foster critical literacy skills in fifth grade social studies. 

(4123) [Master’s Theses/Hamline University]. 

https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/hse_all/412 

Hamman, V. (1994). Using text sets in the social studies curriculum. Southern Social Studies 

  Journal, 20(3), 34-43. 

Hartman, D. K., & Hartman, J. A. (1993). Reading across texts: Expanding the role of the reader. 

  The Reading Teacher, 47(3), 202- 211. 

Hartman, J. A., & Hartman, D. K. (1994). Arranging multi-text reader experiences that expand 

  the reader’s role (No. 604). Urbana-Champaign, IL: Center for the Study of Reading, 

  University of Illinois. 

Hatfield, W. W. (1935). An experience curriculum in English. New York: D. Appleton- 

Century/National Council of Teachers of English. 

Hawkinson, A., & Freedman, L. (2012). Learning about Latin America through multiple texts in 

  middle school classrooms. WOW Stories: Connections from the Classroom, 4(4). 

  Retrieved from http://wowlit.org/on-line-publications/stories/iv4/8/. 

Herber, H. (1970). Teaching reading in content areas. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 

Hoch, M. L., McCarty, R., Gurvitz, D., & Sitkoski, I. (2019). Five key principles: Guided inquiry 

  with multimodal text sets. Reading Teacher, 72(6), 701-710. 

Hynd, C. R. (1999). Teaching students to think critically using multiple texts in history. Journal 

  of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42, 428-436. 

Ivey, G. (2002). Getting started: Manageable literacy practices. Educational Leadership, 60(3), 

  20-23. 

Kelewae, S. (2018). Women artists and women in art. In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), 

  Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural students (pp. 277-286). Leiden/Boston: 

  Brill Sense. 

Kern, D. (2014). Digging the common core with a helpful tool -- text sets. New England Reading 

  Association Journal, 49(2), 104-106. 

Kimmel, S. C., & Carlone, H. B. (2018). Three bags full: Integrating text sets with engineering 

  explorations for young children. Science Activities, 55(1-2), 58-67. 

Krasniqu, F. (2018). Finding peace through war. In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text 

  Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural students (pp. 229-238). Leiden/Boston: Brill 

  Sense. 

Kristeva, J. (1980). Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. New York: 

Columbia University Press. 

Kurkjian, C., Livingston, N., & Siu-Runyan, Y. (2004). Building text sets from Notable  

https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/hse_all/412
https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/hse_all/412


Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          19 

 Books for a Global Society lists. The Reading Teacher, 57(4), 390-398 

Lacina, J. & Griffith, R. L. (2020). Preparing globally minded literacy teachers: Knowledge, 

  practices & case Studies. Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge. 

Lee, S. M. (2018). What are you? A text set about biracial identity. In J. K. Dowdy & R. 

  Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural students (pp. 193- 

200). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Leland, C. & Harste, J.  (1994). Multiple ways of knowing: Curriculum in a new key. Language 

  Arts, 71(5). 337-345. 

Lendak, J. (2018). Understanding Martin Luther King, Jr.: A text set for high school American 

  history. In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for 

  multicultural students (pp. 161-166). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Lenski, S. D. (1998). Intertextual intentions: Making connections across texts. Clearing 

  House, 72(2), 74-80.  

Lent, R. C. (2012). Give it up for Text Sets. In Overcoming textbook fatigue: 21st century tools 

  to revitalize teaching and learning (pp. 146-158). Alexandria, VA: ASCD. 

Lewis, W. & Walpole, S. (2016). Designing your own text sets: A four-text framework to build 

  content knowledge in secondary classrooms. Literacy Today, 33(4), 30-31. 

Lieberman, J.  & Looney, J.  (2013). Multiple texts in practice: Fostering accessibility, 

  engagement, and comprehension. In J. Ippolito, J. F. Lawrence, & C. Zaller (Eds.), 

  Adolescent literacy in the era of the Common Core: From research into practice (pp. 

  163-179). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. 

Lupo, S. M., Strong, J. Z., Lewis, W., Walpole, S., & McKenna, M. C. (2017). Building 

  background knowledge through reading: Rethinking text sets. Journal of Adolescent 

  & Adult Literacy, 61(4), 433-444. 

Lupo, S. M., Berry, A., Thacker, E., Sawyer, A., & Merritt, J. (2019). Rethinking Text Sets 

  to support knowledge building and interdisciplinary learning. The Reading Teacher, 

  73(4), 513-524. 

McCaffrey, M. (2014). Common Core English and Language Arts K-1 exemplar text set: A 

  Critical content analysis of cultural representations [Doctoral dissertation, University 

name] ProQuest LLC]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. 

McCaffrey, M., & Corapi, S. (2017). Creating multicultural and global text sets: A tool to 

  complement the CCSS text exemplars. Talking Points, 28(2), 8-17. 

McGlynn, K. & Kelly, J. (2019). Supplementing the textbook effectively to encourage student 

  growth. Science Scope, 42(5), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/ss19_042_05_36. 

Martin, K. (2018). The Blues: An interdisciplinary approach to using text sets. In J. K. Dowdy & 

  R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural students (pp. 251- 

262). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Mathis, J. B., & Giorgis, C. (1999). Educators as audience for children’s literature: The 

  significance of personal text sets to learners and teachers. Journal of Children's 

  Literature, 25(2), 24-35. 

Mathis, J. B. (2002). Picture book text sets: A novel approach to understanding theme. The 

  Clearing House, 75(3). 127-131 

Mertens, D. M. (2023). Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology: Integrating 

  Diversity with Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods (6th ed.). Sage Publications. 

Monobe, G., & Turner, S. (2018). Using biographical multicultural and international literature 

   across content areas. In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal 



Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          20 

 learning for multicultural students (pp. 129-147). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Moran, R., Billen, M., & Keith, K. (2016). Teaching toward social justice using text sets as 

  mirrors and windows for local, national and global issues. In L. Nganga, & J. Kambutu 

  (Eds.), Social justice education, globalization, and teacher education (pp. 93-120). 

  Charlotte: Information Age Publishing. 

Moss, B. (2011). Boost critical thinking: New titles for thematically based text sets. Voices from 

  the Middle, 19(1), 46-48. 

Nichols, M. (2009). Expanding comprehension with multigenre text sets. New York: Scholastic. 

Ogle, D., & Correa-Kovtun, A. (2010). Supporting English-language learners and struggling 

  readers in content literacy with the “Partner reading and content, too” routine. The 

  Reading Teacher, 63(7), 532-542. 

Opitz, M. F. (1998). Text sets: One way to flex your grouping; In first grade, too! The Reading 

  Teacher, 51(7), 622-624. 

Porter, M. (2018). Beyond names and dates in World War II: A text set for high school history. 

  In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural 

  students (pp. 167-176). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Pytash, K. E., Batchelor, K. E., Kist, W., & Srsen, K. (2014). Lined text sets in the English 

  Classroom. The ALAN Review, 42(1), 51-62. 

Reynolds, D. (2022). What is an ELA text set? Surveying and integrating cognitive, critical and 

  disciplinary lenses. English Teaching: Practice & Critique, 21(1), 98-110. 

  https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-06-2021-0075 

Robb, L. (2002). Multiple texts: Multiple opportunities for teaching and learning. Voices from 

  the middle, 9(4), 28-32. 

Rodesiler, L. (2017). Sports-based text sets: Fostering critical literacy at the intersections of sport 

  and society. Clearing House, 90(2), 35-40. 

Rowe, D. W. (1987). Literacy learning as an intertextual process. In Research in literacy: 

  Merging perspectives: Thirty-sixth yearbook of the National Reading Conference, edited 

  by J. E. Readence and R. S. Baldwin, 101-12. Rochester, NY: National Reading 

  Conference. 

Salerno, A. S., Brown, A., Rutt, A., & Heny, N. A. (2020). How pre-service teachers construct 

  Quad Text Sets for use in secondary classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 96, 

  103147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103147 

Scales, R. Q., & Tracy, K. N. (2017). Using text sets to facilitate critical thinking in sixth 

graders. Literacy Research and Instruction, 56(2). 132-157, 

https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2016.1269268. 

Scullin, B. L. (2018). Understanding those who are different: A text set for middle school 

  language arts curriculum. In J. K.  Dowdy and R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: 

  Multimodal learning for multicultural students (pp. 13-24). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Shanahan, C. (2003). Using multiple texts to teach content. North Central Regional Educational 

  Laboratory. Naperville, IL 

Shanahan, C. (2013). Research in multiple texts and text support. In J. Ippolito, J. F. Lawrence, 

  & C. Zaller (Eds.), Adolescent literacy in the era of the Common Core: From research 

  into practice (pp. 143-161). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. 

Smolen, L. A., Collins, L. J., & Still, K. L. (2008). Enhancing cultural understanding and respect 

  with multicultural text sets in the K-8 Classroom. Ohio Journal of English Language 

  Arts, 48(2), 18-29. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/ETPC-06-2021-0075
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103147


Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          21 

Soalt, J. (2005). Bringing together fictional and informational texts to improve comprehension. 

The Reading Teacher, 58(7), 680-683. DOI:10.1598/RT.63.6.5 

https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.58.7.8  

Souto-Manning, M. (2015). Generative text sets: Tools for negotiating critically inclusive early 

  childhood teacher education pedagogical practices. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher 

  Education, 38(1), 79-101.  

Strop, J. M., & Carlson, J. (2010). Multimedia texts set: Changing the shape of engagement and 

  learning. Portage & Main: Winnipeg, CA. 

Taberski, S. (1990). Fact & fiction read aloud; Give your students a boost in content-area 

  reading: Read aloud paired nonfiction and fiction text sets. Instructor, 110(6), 24-26.  

Tan, S. W. (2018). Everyone has a story: What is yours? In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), 

  Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural students (pp. 185-192). Leiden/Boston: 

  Brill Sense. 

Tatum, A., Wold, L. S. & Elish-Piper, L. (2009). Adolescents and texts: Scaffolding the English 

  canon with linked text sets. The English Journal, 98(6), 88-91.  

Tovani, C. (2004). Do I really have to teach reading? Content comprehension, Grades 6-12. 

Portland, ME: Stenhouse.  

Tracy, K. N., Menickelli, K., & Scales, R. Q. (2016). Courageous voices: Using text sets to 

  inspire change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 60(5), 527-536. 

Tschida, C. M., Ryan, C. L., & Ticknor, A. S. (2014). Building on windows and mirrors: 

  Encouraging the disruption of “single stories” through children’s literature. Journal of 

  Children’s Literature, 40(1), 28-39. 

Tschida, C. M., & Buchanan, L. B. (2015). Tackling controversial topics: Developing thematic 

  text sets for elementary social studies. Social Studies Research and Practice, 10(3), 40- 

56.  

Tunnell, A. M., & Ammon, R. (1996). The story of ourselves: Fostering multiple historical 

  perspectives. Social Education, 60, 212-215. 

Twichell, A. (2018). To infinity and beyond with texts: A text set for high school astronomy. In 

  J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural 

  students (pp. 117-128). Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense.  

Urban, W. J., Jennings L., & Wagoner, J. (2008). American education: A history (4th ed.). NY: 

  Routledge. 

VanSledright, B., & Kelly, C. (1998). Reading American history: The influences of multiple 

  sources on six fifth graders. Elementary School Journal, 98(3), 239-265. 

Wakefield, J. F. (1998, June 12-13). A brief history of textbooks: Where have we been all these 

  years? [Paper presentation]. The meeting of the text and academic authors, St. 

  Petersburg, FL. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED419246.pdf 

Ward, B. A., & Young. T. A. (2008). Text sets: Making connections between and across books. 

  Reading Horizons, 48(3), 215-226. 

Weeks, R. M. (1936). A correlated curriculum. New York: D. Appleton-Century/National  

 Council of Teachers of English. 

Werner, K. (2018). Aesthetics: It’s not always black and white. In J. K. Dowdy & R. Fleischaker 

  (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural students (pp. 269-276).  

 Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Wineburg, S. (1991). Historical problem solving: A study of the cognitive processes used in the 

  evaluation of documentary and pictorial evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 

https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.58.7.8
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED419246.pdf


Freeman & Hardin: Text Sets 

Current Issues in Education, 25(2)          22 

  83(1), 73-87. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.83.1.73. 

Witte, S., & Rybakova, K. (2017). Digging for deeper connections: Building multimodal text  

 scaffolds. The ALAN Review, 45(1), 98-106. 

Wold, L. & Elish-Piper, L. (2009). Scaffolding the English canon with linked text sets. English 

  Journal, 98(6), 88-91. 

Wold, L. S., Elish-Piper, L.& Schultz, B.  (2010). Engaging high school students in reading and 

  understanding the canon through the use of linked text sets. College Reading Association 

  Yearbook, 31, 391-401. 

Young, M. (2018). Counting our way through kindergarten using text sets. In J. K. Dowdy & R. 

  Fleischaker (Eds.), Text Sets: Multimodal learning for multicultural students (pp. 73-84). 

  Leiden/Boston: Brill Sense. 

Young, T. A., & Ward, B. A. (2010, June). Classroom extension: An amphibian text set. Book 

  Links, 19, 21. 

Zengin, M. (2016). An introduction to intertextuality as a literary theory: Definitions, axioms and 

  the originators. Pamukkale University Journal of Social Sciences Institute / Pamukkale 

  Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Appendix 1, 299-326. https://doi- 

org.uscupstate.idm.oclc.org/10.5505/pausbed.2016.96729 

 

Author Notes 

Greta G. Freeman  

ORCiD: 0000-0003-4986-2675 

University of South Carolina - Upstate 

freemang@uscupstate.edu 

 

Brooke L. Hardin 

ORCiD: 0009-0009-7815-4476 

University of South Carolina - Upstate 

bhardin2@uscupstate.edu  

 

More details of this Creative Commons license are available at 

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/. Current Issues in 

Education is published by the Mary Lou Fulton Institute and Graduate 

School of Education at Arizona State University . 

 

https://doi-/
mailto:freemang@uscupstate.edu
mailto:bhardin2@uscupstate.edu
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

	Monobe, G., & Turner, S. (2018). Using biographical multicultural and international literature