FEATURE ARTICLE
Making the Move Online: Interactive
Read-­Alouds for the Virtual Classroom
Lindsay Stoetzel, Stephanie J. Shedrow
Interactive read-­alouds play a powerful role in face-­to-­face literacy
classrooms, but how do we intentionally adapt this practice for virtual
classroom spaces?
R
eading aloud to children has been cited as
the single most important activity for read-
ing success, both at home and in school set-
tings (Anderson, Hiebert, Scott, & Wilkinson, 1985;
McCormick, 1977; Neumann, Copple, & Bredekamp,
2000). Research has demonstrated the positive
impact that reading aloud has on children’s lan-
guage and literacy development (e.g., Blewitt, Rump,
Shealy, & Cook, 2009; Sipe, 2000), including enthu-
siasm for reading (Trelease, 2019), reading fluency
(Fountas & Pinnell, 1996), comprehension (Greene
Brabham & Lynch-­Brown, 2002), and speaking and
listening skills (Barrentine, 1996; Sipe, 2000).
Furthermore, literacy gains increase when teachers
use interactive read-­alouds to engage students in pur-
poseful discussion throughout the reading experience
(Greene Brabham & Lynch-­Brown, 2002). Importantly,
researchers have noted that the success of interactive
read-­alouds is contingent on the dialogue between
teachers and students, where new meaning is con-
structed through social interactions and the teacher’s
ability to scaffold language and literacy development
by providing feedback to student responses (Greene
Brabham & Lynch-­Brown, 2002; Wiseman, 2011).
When schools abruptly shifted to virtual edu-
cation in the spring of 2020, teachers, parents, and
community members raised concerns about limited
book access and potential gaps in children’s literacy
development. The result was a flood of internet vid-
eos featuring teachers, authors, celebrities, and even
public servants reading children’s picture books
aloud. These digital read-­a louds are carried out
using technologies, either synchronously through
conferencing tools (e.g., Zoom, Google Meet) or asyn-
chronously through prerecorded videos.
Yet, little research has analyzed the purpose
or effectiveness of digital read-­alouds as a literacy
The Reading Teacher   Vol. 74   No. 6   pp. 747–756
practice. As teachers have been pushed to make
the transition to online learning and technologies
almost overnight, we must ask how to intentionally
transition traditionally face-­t o-­face instructional
practices into the digital realm. Although the task
can feel insurmountable, building sustainable struc-
tures through intentional planning can foster the
consistency and efficacy that teachers and students
need to continually expand the digital learning
experience and increase the flexibility and respon-
siveness of instructional design over time.
As literacy teacher educators, we began our
own transition to virtual learning environments
by focusing on interactive read-­a louds, one of the
core practices routinely taught in our literacy edu-
cation courses. Finding ourselves teaching in a
mix of online, blended, and HyFlex classes, we are
also preparing preservice teachers to recognize the
nuances between delivery modes and the design of
learning experiences. Online learning is typically
delivered in fully virtual settings, whereas blended
learning attempts to customize student learning
by intentionally integrating face-­to-­face and online
experiences. More recently, HyFlex emerged on the
national stage as an elaborated version of blended
learning that allows students to choose face-­to-­face
and/or virtual participation as it suits their interests
and needs at any given time.
Lindsay Stoetzel is an assistant professor in the Education
Department at Ferris State University, Big Rapids, MI, USA;
email stoetzl@ferris.edu.
Stephanie J. Shedrow is an assistant professor in the
Department of Teacher Education at St. Norbert College,
De Pere, WI, USA; email stephanie.shedrow@snc.edu.
747 doi:10.1002/trtr.2006   © 2021 International Literacy Association
 Feature Article

Yet, no matter the mode, taking the time to when reading instruction is viewed from a socio-
examine the purpose and context of practices is cultural perspective drawing on their funds of
important to help understand why teachers do what knowledge.
they do. In the following sections, we offer a pro- From this lens, literacy engagement is always a
cess for thoughtful instructional design that can be socially situated act, and it is through these social
applied across practices and teaching environments. interactions that individuals come to construct
their own meaning about what texts say and, more
important, why it matters.
Perspectives PAUSE AND PONDER Maintaining this stance in the
In this section, we draw on rel- design of literacy instruction is
evant research that has shaped essential to provide opportuni-
■ How do you use traditional read-­
the design and implementation of ties for readers to draw on and
alouds in your literacy classroom—­
using digital read-­alouds in the lit- in face-­to-­face or virtual contexts? elaborate their understandings
eracy classroom. First, we define of what they read in conjunc-
literacy from a sociocultural lens ■ What affordances and limitations are tion with their understandings
as paramount to understanding offered by ready-­made read-­alouds of themselves and their worlds.
you may currently be using in your
how literacy occurs and the factors
instruction?
that shape literacy experiences.
■ How could you use digital read-­
Read-­Alouds as an
Then, we define the read-­aloud as
an instructional practice used to alouds to more intentionally support Instructional Practice
support a number of literacy goals. a variety of reading goals in your A nu mb er of st ud ie s have
classroom? shown that language and lit-
Finally, we describe important con-
siderations for designing literacy eracy learning and develop-
experiences in virtual environ- ment can be supported through
ments, further refining the practice of reading aloud interactive classroom read-­alouds (e.g., Hoffman, 2011;
on the basis of the new context in which so much Lennox, 2013; Sipe, 2002; Wiseman, 2011). An interac-
learning currently takes place. tive read-­ aloud occurs when a teacher reads a book or
a section of a book aloud to a group of students and
prompts interaction with the text through meaning-
Literacy Engagement From ful and open discussion before, during, and/or after
a Sociocultural Lens reading. As Smolkin and Donovan (2002) explained,
Until the late 1970s, reading comprehension was the read-­aloud is an inherently socialized activity, as
situated in text-­centered literacy analysis and left the teacher “genuinely shares, not abandons, authority
little room for interpretation. Rosenblatt’s (1978) with the children” (p. 28).
transactional approach to comprehension shifted The read-­aloud often integrates print referencing
this paradigm and resituated readers and individual to build understandings about concepts of print and
understanding at the forefront of meaning making draw attention to visual literacies as readers work
from text. As a precursor to the sociocultural model to build multifaceted understandings about what
of reading comprehension, the text is recognized it means to read. Conducting read-­alouds with pic-
as socially and culturally constructed as part of the ture books, in particular, supports readers to engage
sociocultural context, which includes the reader, the in multimodal meaning making, as young readers
text, and the activity of reading itself (Freebody & learn to read the pictures as context clues or as
Luke, 1990). older readers learn to critique meaning and repre-
Central to these ideas is the understanding that sentation as expressed through multiple layers and
all individuals possess funds of knowledge. Moll, modes (Serafini, 2013).
Amanti, Neff, and González (1992) described funds Oral language development is also fostered
of knowledge as “historically accumulated and cul- through engagement in sophisticated conversa-
turally developed bodies of knowledge and skills tions and as readers develop understandings of
essential for household or individual functioning conventions and language use in the texts they
and well-­being” (p. 133). Researchers (e.g., González, hear (Dickinson & Tabors, 2001). In turn, children
Moll, & Amanti, 2006; Moje et al., 2004) have found can employ this language in discussions or during
that students display greater literacy achievement play (Pellegrini & Galda, 1993). Furthermore, the

748
The Reading Teacher   Vol. 74   No. 6   May/June 2021literacyworldwide.org
 Feature Article
discussions that take place during a read-­aloud can
not only teach students how and when to apply spe-
cific reading strategies but also provide a context
for explicit teaching of literacy skills, such as print
awareness, vocabulary knowledge, and language and
text comprehension (Blewitt et al., 2009; Duursma,
Augustyn, & Zuckerman, 2008; Justice, 2002; Justice,
Mashburn, Hamre, & Pianta, 2008; Silverman, 2007;
Wiseman, 2011; Zucker, Justice, Piasta, & Kaderavek,
2010).
However, not all read-­alouds are created equal.
Hoffman, Roser, and Battle (1993) found, after 537
classroom observations, that most read-­alouds were
poorly structured with little discussion or relevance
to the current unit of study. Researchers also have
found that discussion during read-­a louds rarely
focused on common approaches to comprehension,
typically used ineffective supports, and often lacked
intentionality (Beck & McKeown, 2001; Dickinson &
Tabors, 2001).
Although there is no one way to conduct a read-­
aloud, the vast body of research has pointed to
important threads of effective read-­alouds, includ-
ing the following:
■ A consistent structure (Wiseman, 2011)
■ Purposeful selection of highly engaging texts
with rich vocabulary (Beck & McKeown, 2001;
Justice, 2002)
■ Discussions and repeated readings that draw
on new vocabulary (Blewitt et al., 2009; Flack,
Field, & Horst, 2018)
■ Open-­ e nded questioning techniques that
extend students’ language and thinking (Len­
nox, 2013)
■ A focus on inferential skills that provide ample
opportunities for students to use their funds
of knowledge (Hoffman, 2011; Lennox, 2013;
Wiseman, 2011)
■ Scaffolds that employ a variety of strategies
(Christenson, 2016; Pentimonti & Justice, 2010)
■ Ample time for students to co-­construct mean-
ing by responding to one another without
teacher interruption (Justice et al., 2008)
■ Teacher pedagogical skills and knowledge to
address students’ misconceptions by recon-
structing or assisting in meaning making
(Hoffman, 2011; Lennox, 2013)
These recommendations are critical for designing
digital read-­a loud experiences, which must also
749
The Reading Teacher   Vol. 74   No. 6   May/June 2021literacyworldwide.org
account for environmental factors related to the vir-
tual learning experience.
Digital Literacies and Environments
Research on educational technologies has continued
to emphasize the role that technologies play as tools
teachers can leverage to enhance learning experi-
ences. However, it is the teacher’s use of instruc-
tional design that is most likely to impact learning
outcomes, not the presence of the technology itself
(Foulger, Graziano, Schmidt-­C rawford, & Slykhuis,
2017). Similarly, e-­books or digital read-­alouds serve
as one additional resource teachers may draw on.
Although different formats and types of e-­b ooks
include a number of added features in comparison
with traditional print texts (Larson, 2012), research
has emphasized that learning is impacted most by
the integration and use of features, not the type of
e-­book itself (Kucirkova, 2020).
Furthermore, the instructional design and use
within an online learning environment must be
guided by intentional planning on the teacher’s
part. Simply assigning a digital text or recorded
read-­aloud in isolation may extend reading opportu-
nities but not necessarily enhance reading skills or
growth. Therefore, teachers need to make strategic
use of the purpose behind instructional choices.
For example, Thoermer and Williams (2012) sug-
gested that replaying digital readings can illustrate
elements of prosody and expression to support read-
ing fluency. Kucirkova (2020) illustrated how open-­
ended e-­books can bridge home-­to-­school literacies.
Also, Bates et al. (2017) offered potential consider-
ations for how e-­book features, such as narration,
hot spots, auditory features, and visual features, can
impact early reading development. Matching the
affordances of tools with research on literacy prac-
tices is key to intentionality.
Additionally, teachers should consider features of
virtual learning environments that will impact how
students engage with and develop through these
literacy experiences. For example, asynchronous
and synchronous activities will impact how mean-
ing is constructed and the degree to which social
engagement is facilitated. Not surprisingly, the key
to meaningful instructional design relies less on the
structure and more on how teachers draw on peda-
gogical knowledge to scaffold student engagement.
In a literature review comparing K–­1 2 online
and blended teaching competencies, Pulham and
Graham (2018) found flexibility and personalization
 Feature Article
to be the most frequent themes related to pedagogy,
followed by student-­centered learning. Additional
themes included student collaboration, building a
community, fostering student creativity, problem-­
based learning, and motivating students. These
features clearly align with a sociocultural vision of
literacy learning that grounds learning in student
engagement.
Multimodal texts offer yet another opportu-
nity for students to share their funds of knowledge
through interactive read-­alouds. Although all texts
can be considered multimodal, digital texts often
integrate highly multimodal features that extend
reading experiences through the affordances and
limitations of modalities and tools (Kress, 2005).
Teachers need to be aware of these features to guide
their design of learning experiences, e­ specially for
digital read-­alouds.
Putting It All Together
Drawing on these perspectives helps in framing the
design of literacy practices as educators transition
away from fully face-­to-­face learning environments.
A sociocultural understanding of literacy engage-
ment requires teachers to emphasize the potential
of interactive read-­alouds as opportunities to engage,
motivate, and apprentice readers into the active pro-
cess of making meaning from text.
Although literal comprehension of text remains
important, the ever-­c hanging demand for criti-
cal meaning making can be fostered through read-­
alouds by analyzing texts from unique perspectives
and applying funds of knowledge to create informed
inferences (Hoffman, 2011). In the next section, we
provide strategies for analyzing the purpose and
implementation of digital read-­alouds as an interac-
tive and socially situated literacy practice.
Creating and Using
Digital Read-­Alouds
By drawing on these bodies of research, educators
can begin to unpack the characteristics of intentional
teacher decision making when using digital read-­
alouds in the literacy classroom. We ask, How do we
build on principles of sociocultural theory to create a
meaning-­based literacy experience for our readers?
What purpose does our use of read-­a louds serve?
To what degree does this purpose engage students,
honor funds of knowledge, and foster higher level lit-
eracy learning? How can we leverage the affordances
750
The Reading Teacher   Vol. 74   No. 6   May/June 2021literacyworldwide.org
of online learning environments to design literacy
experiences?
These questions make it clear that simply post-
ing a link to a prerecorded read-­aloud is not likely
to align with the theoretical grounding we have pro-
vided thus far. In this section, we offer tools to guide
reflection and help teachers design more intentional
digital read-­aloud experiences. Whether using ready-­
made read-­alouds or creating your own, maintaining
copyright boundaries is important. Although many
publishers have relaxed usage rules during the cur-
rent pandemic (Ishizuka, 2021), teachers may need
to adjust sharing privileges on new and previously
created read-­alouds as policies change in the future.
Ready-­Made Read-­Alouds Available Online
In Table 1, we describe the main formats and fea-
tures of ready-­made read-­alouds circulating openly
online. (Note: We do not address resources that
require payment or subscription.) We use the term
ready-­made to describe read-­alouds that have already
been read and exist online as accessible materials
ready for use. Although any read-­a loud can share
features of the multiple forms listed next, our goal
is to illustrate elements that teachers should be
aware of when selecting and planning to use differ-
ent formats. Additionally, these resources may serve
as mentor texts to illustrate the different forms and
possibilities for teacher-­created read-­alouds.
Planning for Digital Read-­Alouds
Whether teachers choose to use a ready-­made read-­
aloud or create one themselves, the checklist in
Figure 1 offers a starting point to guide brainstorm-
ing. Important considerations include purpose, text
selection, time frame, technologies, and student
engagement.
Purpose. As illustrated in Table 1, different types
of read-­a louds can support varying purposes, so
identifying a clear goal for reading aloud is critical.
Interactive read-­alouds are often conducted for en-
joyment (Leland, Lewison, & Harste, 2018, consider
read-­alouds as advertisements for reading), but they
also create opportunities to explicitly teach literacy
practices. Reviewing previously taught strategies,
such as character analysis or how an author creates
tension, is ideal for read-­alouds. Teachers can also
use read-alouds to model proficient reading habits,
such as revising predictions through a think-­aloud
or evaluating a character’s motives.
 Feature Article

Table 1
Types of Ready-­Made Read-­Alouds

Digital read-­
aloud format What it looks like
Recorded story This form features
time celebrities, local
community members,
and educators as readers
performing a story time.
The reader may or may not
show the pages of the book
while reading.
Shared The book is held close to
reading (may the camera for students to
include digital view, or pages are digitally
adaptations to presented. This form may
text) also use digital texts, rather
than print texts, to offer the
highest quality image. The
format may include digital
enhancements related to
auditory or visual elements.
Read-­aloud with The reader directly engages ■ All of the above
opportunities with the viewer before, ■ May develop vocabulary
for synchronous during, and after reading
interaction by pausing and prompting
thinking and responses. ■ Engage active reading.
Read-­aloud with Accompanying materials
guidance for foster synchronous
synchronous participation when
participation viewed in the company of
others.
Potential purpose Sample resource(s)
■ Listen to stories, foster ■ DSEA Literacy Channel:
engagement, and extend https://www.youtu​be.com/
access to texts when the chann​el/UCcmn​THphM​m-­
physical environment may be YhkGA​LD8zd​xg?app=desktop
limited. ■ KidLitTV: https://www.kidlit.
tv/2017/10/read-­loud-­hildi​e-­
bitte​rpick​les-­needs​-­sleep/
■ Harper Kids From Home:
https://www.youtu​be.com/
playl​ist?app=deskt​
op&list=PLiYz​MwyBP​G96ED​
jV7MA​ohaCn​XoQnq​iBmG
■ Kid Lit TV: https://www.kidlit.
tv/categ​ory/read-­out-­loud/
■ All of the above ■ Brightly Storytime: https://
■ Support concepts of print www.youtu​be.com/chann​el/
■ Foster visual and multimodal UCvQa​gFNHM​r GgQp​Yunk4​
literacy rHXg?app=desktop
■ Build fluency skills
■ Digital enhancements may
offer more targeted support
for comprehension or
decoding skills.
■ Curiosity Club With Mrs.
Ghazali: https://www.youtu​
knowledge, comprehension be.com/chann​el/UCmn4​
skills, or decoding skills uL7KD​pRf_M6xbw​Z8Cow​
?app=desktop
■ All of the above ■ Storyline Online: https://www.
■ Discussion questions can story​lineo​nline.net/
probe and deepen reader
response in relation to any
of the reading constructs
listed above.

Text Selection. The purpose of the read-­aloud drives
the text selection. When using ready-­made read-­
alouds, text selection includes both the story and
how it is presented. Table 1 highlights how ready-­
made read-­a louds vary in form and element. For
example, a ready-­m ade read-­a loud that does not
include use of illustrations would undermine many
literacy goals for the youngest readers. Additionally,
teachers should consider a wide variety of genres
when selecting read-­a loud texts. Poetry and in-
formational texts are often overlooked but offer
students a range of learning opportunities (Lennox,
2013).
Most important, we encourage teachers to use
read-­alouds as an opportunity to serve as windows
and mirrors where students can not only see them-
selves in text but also be introduced to alternative
worldviews and identities to their own (Bishop,
1990). Using a wide variety of quality texts that act
as windows can spark deep and meaningful trans-
actional discussions (Rosenblatt, 1978) that disrupt
the single-story stereotypes that are often presented

751
The Reading Teacher   Vol. 74   No. 6   May/June 2021literacyworldwide.org
 Feature Article
Figure 1
Digital Read-­Aloud Planning Checklist
Purpose: What is your instructional goal/purpose for
1. 
using a read-­aloud? Which read-­aloud format best
serves this goal?
2. Text selection: Will you use a print text or a digital
text? How well does the text align with your
purposes? Which characters or experiences are
represented in the text?
3. Time frame: What is your time frame (realistically, not
ideally)? Keep in mind that the more sophisticated
the format, the more time it may require.
4. Technologies: What technologies will you need to
create a read-­aloud in your selected format? Do you
have access to these tools? How much time will it
take to familiarize yourself to using these tools?
5. Student engagement: How will students engage
with this read-­aloud? How will you create an
interactive experience when situating this read-­
aloud in the classroom?
in curriculum and popular culture (Adichie, 2009).
Moreover, books that act as mirrors create cultur-
ally relevant experiences in which students can
meaningfully draw on their funds of knowledge
and engage in active discussions by co-­constructing
meaning and extending thinking (González et al.,
2006).
Drawing on students’ backgrounds and ways of
being, especially while teaching virtually, can be a
complex task. It is important for teachers to learn
about students and their families before selecting
texts to draw on prior experiences. Surveys and
interest inventories are great ways for teachers to
learn about families’ expertise and talents. Likewise,
activities like sharing time, in which students share
cultural artifacts and family stories, can provide
space for students and families to highlight their
culture and interests (Protacio & Edwards, 2015).
Discussions can also be conducted through video
conferencing or digital dialogue journals in which
teachers and families correspond via video recorded
messages. Providing fun and interesting questions
for any of these activities (e.g., “If your family could
have any pet, what would it be, and why?”) can
encourage participation and build community.
Time Frame. Planning for time frame acknowledges
both the time that goes into developing a read-­aloud
752
The Reading Teacher   Vol. 74   No. 6   May/June 2021literacyworldwide.org
experience and the time needed to implement the
activity within instruction. Teachers should keep in
mind that time allocation must extend beyond the
length of the video to include previewing activities
and opportunities for engagement during and after
reading. Additionally, if you are designing your own
read-­aloud, the type of format you choose will dic-
tate the complexity and time required for the design
process. Sometimes a ready-­made read-­aloud is the
only feasible option when the time frame is tight.
Technology. Technology needs to be considered on
two fronts. First, teachers need to consider the tech-
nology available to them. Equally, if not more impor-
tant, teachers must also consider the technology ac-
cessibility of their students.
Although teachers may feel overwhelmed by
a lack of self-­efficacy in teaching with technology,
starting small when reaching beyond one’s comfort
zone can be helpful. Using ready-­made read-­alouds
can relieve much of the pressure and allow teachers
to focus on their professional expertise by building
interactive experiences around the text. Teachers’
developing digital literacy skills and confidence
in using technological tools for these purposes
can then encourage risk-­t aking toward designing
teacher-­c reated read-­alouds—­and even eventually
co-­creating them with students.
When creating a read-­aloud, the purpose of it will
determine what the students’ experience should
look like. Consider what exactly students need to
be able to see. Text? Pictures? A full spread (two
pages side by side)? The technology available, such
as smartphones, laptops, document cameras, micro-
phones, and editing software, will set the parame-
ters of possibilities for how the read-­aloud will look
and sound. Table 2 outlines examples of features
and affordances of digital tools that can be used to
design a digital read-­aloud.
Teachers also need to consider the technology
students can access. Will students have the hard-
ware and internet to toggle between the learning
management system, such as Google Classroom or
Seesaw, and a website or application to respond to
questions or interact with peers? Additionally, teach-
ers might need to consult their school IT department
to ensure that any applications and websites they
select protect students’ identities and have been
approved for use.
Student Engagement. Aligning with the sociocul-
tural model of reading comprehension, we believe
 Feature Article

Table 2
Tools to Facilitate Digital Read-­Alouds

Technology tool Description

Jamboard By creating Jams, this interactive whiteboard, part of the G Workspace, can be used to
facilitate a wide variety of before-­, during-­, and after-­reading activities. Teachers can create
sticky notes for think-­alouds, underline text using a laser pointer, create text, or use a draw
feature. Jams can also be shared with students for independent practice.
Pear Deck Teachers can easily create synchronous and asynchronous interactive learning
opportunities (e.g., multiple-choice or open-response questions, polls, drag and drop,
highlighting) that can be inserted into Google Slides. As a Google Classroom add-­on, the
interactive slides are easy to create or import and do not require students to navigate to
another program or application.
Zoom Whiteboard Like a digital chalkboard, the whiteboard in Zoom (a screen-­sharing option) allows users to
create text and draw. Whiteboards can also be saved as pictures.
Cute Cursor This Chrome extension allows users to replace their standard arrow mouse cursor with a self-­
selected icon. This works in any document that can be opened in Chrome, including Fountas and
Pinnell Resources and Epic! and easily draws students’ attention to a specific word or part of the
text.

that engagement in interactive read-­a louds must
not only draw on students’ funds of knowledge but
also provide opportunities for validation (of oneself
and peers). How a read-­aloud will be delivered (syn-
chronously or asynchronously) is important when
considering engagement. Each mode of delivery
and learning management system offers distinctive
features that teachers can capitalize on to increase
engagement.
Just as in face-­to-­face classrooms, engagement
in a digital read-­a loud can take place before, dur-
ing, or after reading. Ready-­made read-­a louds can
be paused, whether being used synchronously or
asynchronously, to engage students in the types
of interactions that would take place during face-­
to-­f ace read-­a louds. Additionally, it is important
to note that most ready-­made read-­a louds do not
offer book previews or introductions (Thoermer &
Williams, 2012). Just as when conducting a face-­
to-­f ace read-­a loud, these should be incorporated
to activate background knowledge or provide stu-
dents with information needed to comprehend the
text.
Implications for Practice
Synchronous Classrooms. Digital classrooms that are
synchronous offer teachers the greatest opportunity
to facilitate read-­aloud discussions similar to those
conducted in face-­to-­face classrooms. However, this
can be difficult to manage digitally with an entire
class of students.
When working with primary-­g rade students, we
suggest using small groups. Conducting the read-­
aloud in groups of four to eight allows more oppor-
tunities for students to participate and can be less
intimidating. Whole-­class read-­alouds can be con-
ducted meaningfully by incorporating think-­alouds,
calls-­a nd-­r esponses, or technological tools that
align with the purpose for the read-­aloud (see Table
2 for examples).
For older students, short responses to questions
or prompts can be conducted in real-­t ime applica-
tions (e.g., Poll Everywhere, Socrative, Pear Deck).
Extensive discussions with older students can
also be conducted in breakout rooms or by creat-
ing individual meeting rooms for small groups of
students.
Ideally, read-­a loud discussions are led by stu-
dents, and they freely respond to one another with-
out prompting from the teacher (Justice et al., 2008).
To navigate this with an entire class, the “raise your
hand” tool can be used for students to show they
wish to speak. However, for the dialogue to emu-
late an authentic interactive discussion, teachers
must act only as a moderator to call on students
when it is their turn. A modification when work-
ing with younger students, or when using a learning

753
The Reading Teacher   Vol. 74   No. 6   May/June 2021literacyworldwide.org
 Feature Article
management system without the “raise your hand”
feature, is for students to raise a colored piece
of paper when they are ready to contribute to the
discussion.
Asynchronous Classrooms. Although discussion in
asynchronous classrooms will not happen in real
time, it can still foster critical inquiry into texts and
draw on the core components of the sociocultural
model of reading. One common means of facilitating
asynchronous discussion is through traditional dis-
cussion boards, where a student makes a post and
peers respond with a comment. An adaptation to
a traditional discussion board may ask students to
post and respond through video or audio recordings.
To scaffold the use of discussion boards, teach-
ers can begin by creating individual discussion
threads with students. By modeling how to respond
to comments, as well as continuing a line of discus-
sion through multiple discussion posts, students
will better understand how to efficiently participate
in an online discussion. Once ready, students can
begin to discuss with one another in small groups
of three to six.
Parents, caregivers, or older siblings can also
assist in facilitating discussions with students.
Providing a discussion outline (either teacher cre-
ated or similar to those provided with the ready-­
made read-­a louds on Storyline Online: https://
storylineonline.​net/) can bring book discussions into
the home. Asking parents and caregivers to record
the discussions can complete the loop, allowing
teachers to listen in and respond to student mean-
ing making, while simultaneously bridging home
and school literacies.
In addition to discussion boards, a variety of
technology tools allows students to respond to
prompts synchronously or asynchronously. For
example, Pear Deck (see Table 2) is a tool that can be
used with any grade and does not require students
to leave the linked presentation while creating indi-
vidual responses.
Before Beginning. Important considerations when
designing and facilitating synchronous or asyn-
chronous digital discussion is teacher frontloading.
First, teachers need to instruct students on what to
include in recordings and how to respond meaning-
fully to peers.
Teachers can also scaffold student responses by
initially offering discussion questions to students.
Thoughtfully crafted questions can help students
754
The Reading Teacher   Vol. 74   No. 6   May/June 2021literacyworldwide.org
in thinking critically about a text and spark lively
discussion. The following are just a few examples
of ways teachers can begin a student discussion or
pose a question:
■ Post a short (less than 30 seconds) video of a
character from a book or television show and
ask students to compare the character in the
video with a character in the book. (This could
also be done with a picture.)
■ Select a page from the book with a critical or
interesting line of text or picture and post it
with a what or why question, or simply allow
students to respond to the page on their own
(e.g., “What do you see here?”; “What is happen-
ing on this page?”).
■ Ask students to react to the book by using only
a picture.
■ “What does ___ mean to you?”
■ “What surprised you? Why?”
■ “Did the book end how you thought it would or
wanted it to?”
■ “What questions do you have?”
■ “What do you think the author wanted us to
learn from this book?”
■ “How does the author or illustrator let us
know….?”
■ “What interesting words did the author use?”
■ “How did [character] change in the story?”
■ “Why did [character] change in the story?”
Questions can (and should) also be tailored to the
read-­aloud book. The key is to create a prompt that
asks students not only to demonstrate their under-
standing of what they heard but also to think about
something in a new or interesting way through
inferences.
Conclusion
The transition to online, blended, or HyFlex teach-
ing environments can pose challenges and offer
possibilities to enhance traditional literacy prac-
tices. Yet, it is important to note that we do not yet
know what the impact of these designs might be
on actual reading development. How will students
engage with any of these types of read-­a louds? To
what degree will they replicate the experience of
the traditional practice? To what degree might they
amplify it? We look forward to learning more as
we continue to explore how literacy practices take
 Feature Article
TAKE ACTION!
1. Analyze the ready-­made or teacher-­created digital
read-­alouds currently in use in your classroom (using
the features in Table 1).
2. Examine how the read-­aloud is currently situated in
your classroom. What does the experience look like?
How does it reinforce sociocultural goals of literacy
engagement?
3. Evaluate the instructional purpose for using these
read-­alouds or identify a new purpose you might
intentionally address.
4. Use the Digital Read-­Aloud Planning Checklist to
design (or redesign) a virtual read-­aloud experience
for your classroom.
5. Gain confidence as you explore with students.
6. When you feel comfortable with engaging readers
through the virtual platform, take a leap and record
your own digital read-­aloud to share with students.
shape in the new normal of flexible, hybrid learning
environments.
REFERENCES
Adichie, C.N. (2009, July). The danger of a single story [Video].
TED Conferences. https://www.ted.com/talks/​chima​manda_
ngozi_​adich​ie_the_danger_of_a_single_story​?langu​age=en
Anderson, R.C., Hiebert, E.H., Scott, J.A., & Wilkinson, I.A.
(1985). Becoming a nation of readers. Washington, DC: National
Institute of Education.
Barrentine, S.J. (1996). Engaging with reading through interac-
tive read-­alouds. The Reading Teacher, 50(1), 36–­43.
Bates, C.C., Klein, A., Schubert, B., McGee, L., Anderson, N.,
Dorn, K., … Ross, R.H. (2017). E-­Books and e-­book apps:
Considerations for beginning readers. The Reading Teacher,
70(4), 401–­411. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1543
Beck, I.L., & McKeown, M.G. (2001). Text talk: Capturing the
benefits of read-­aloud experiences for young children. The
Reading Teacher, 55(1), 10–­20.
Bishop, R.S. (1990). Mirrors, windows, and sliding glass doors. Per-
spectives: Choosing and Using Books for the Classroom, 6(3), ix–­xi.
Blewitt, P., Rump, K.M., Shealy, S.E., & Cook, S.A. (2009). Shared
book reading: When and how questions affect young chil-
dren’s word learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(2),
294–­304. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013844
Christenson, L.A. (2016). Class interactive reading aloud
(CIRA): A holistic lens on interactive reading aloud session
in kindergarten. Educational Research Review, 11(23), 2138–­
2145. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR20​16.2874
Dickinson, D.K., & Tabors, P.O. (2001). Beginning literacy with lan-
guage: Young children learning at home and school. Baltimore,
MD: Paul H. Brookes.
Duursma, E., Augustyn, M., & Zuckerman, B. (2008). Reading
aloud to children: The evidence. Archives of Disease in Child-
hood, 93(7), 554–­557. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.2006.106336
755
The Reading Teacher   Vol. 74   No. 6   May/June 2021literacyworldwide.org
Flack, Z.M., Field, A.P., & Horst, J.S. (2018). The effects of shared
storybook reading on word learning: A meta-­analysis. Devel-
opmental Psychology, 54(7), 1334–­1346. https://doi.org/10.​1037/
dev00​00512
Foulger, T.S., Graziano, K.J., Schmidt-­ Crawford, D.A., &
Slykhuis, D.A. (2017). Teacher education technology com-
petencies. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 25(4),
413–­4 48.
Fountas, I.C., & Pinnell, G.S. (1996). Guided reading: Good first
teaching for all children. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Freebody, P., & Luke, A. (1990). Literacies programs: Debates
and demands in cultural context. Prospect: An Australian
Journal of TESOL, 5(3), 7–­16.
González, N., Moll, L.C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2006). Funds of
knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and
classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge.
Greene Brabham, E., & Lynch-­Brown, C. (2002). Effects of teach-
ers’ reading-­ aloud styles on vocabulary acquisition and
comprehension of students in the early elementary grades.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 465–­473. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0022-­0663.94.3.465
Hoffman, J.L. (2011). Coconstructing meaning: Interactive lit-
erary discussions in kindergarten read-­alouds. The Reading
Teacher, 65(3), 183–­194. https://doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01025
Hoffman, J.V., Roser, N.L., & Battle, J. (1993). Reading aloud in
classrooms: From the model toward a “model”. The Reading
Teacher, 46(6), 496–­503.
Ishizuka, K. (2021, February 15). Abrams, HarperCollins, and
Peachtree extend permission for readalouds to June 30. School
Library Journal. https://www.slj.com/?detai​lStor ​y=​remot​e-­​
learn​ing-­still​-­the-­norm-­publi​shers​-­exten​d-­permi​ssion​s-­for-­
read-­aloud​s-­COVID​-­19
Justice, L.M. (2002). Word exposure conditions and preschool-
ers’ novel word learning during shared storybook reading.
Reading Psychology, 23(2), 87–­106. https://doi.org/10.​1080/02702​
71027​60351016
Justice, L.M., Mashburn, A.J., Hamre, B.K., & Pianta, R.C. (2008).
Quality of language and literacy instruction in preschool
classrooms serving at-­risk pupils. Early Childhood Research
Quarterly, 23(1), 51–­68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.​2007.​
09.004
Kress, G. (2005). Before writing: Rethinking the paths to literacy.
London, UK: Routledge.
Kucirkova, N. (2020). Toward reciprocity and agency in stu-
dents’ digital reading. The Reading Teacher, 73(6), 825–­831.
https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1893
Larson, L.C. (2012). It’s time to turn the digital page: Preser-
vice teachers explore e-­book reading. Journal of Adolescent &
Adult Literacy, 56(4), 280–­290. https://doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.​
00141
Leland, C.H., Lewison, M., & Harste, J.C. (2018). Teaching
children’s literature: It’s critical! (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Lennox, S. (2013). Interactive read‐alouds—an avenue for
enhancing children’s language for thinking and understand-
ing: A review of recent research. Early Childhood Education
Journal, 41, 381–­389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1064​3-​­013-​0578-­5
McCormick, S. (1977). Should you read aloud to your children?
Language Arts, 54(2), 139–­163.
Moje, E.B., Ciechanowski, K.M., McIntosh, K., Kramer, K., Ellis,
L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third
space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday
funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quar-
terly, 39(1), 38–­70. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.39.1.4
Moll, L.C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & González, N. (1992). Funds
of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to
connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2),
132–­141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405​8 4920​9543534
 Feature Article

Neumann, S.B., Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2000). Learning to
read and write: Developmentally appropriate practices for young
children. Washington, DC: National Association for the Edu-
cation of Young Children.
Pellegrini, A.D., & Galda, L. (1993). Ten years after: A reexamina-
tion of symbolic play and literacy research. Reading Research
Quarterly, 28(2), 162–­175. https://doi.org/10.​2307/747887
Pentimonti, J.M., & Justice, L.M. (2010). Teachers’ use of scaf-
folding strategies during read alouds in the preschool
classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(4), 241–­248.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s1064​3-­0 09-­0348-­6
Protacio, S., & Edwards, P.A. (2015). Restructuring sharing
time for English learners and their parents. The Reading
Teacher, 68(6), 413–­421. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1327
Pulham, E., & Graham, C.R. (2018). Comparing K-­12 online and
blended teaching competencies: A literature review. Dis-
tance Education, 39(3), 411–­432. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587​
919.2018.1476840
Rosenblatt, L.M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The trans-
actional theory of the literary work. Carbondale: Southern Illi-
nois University Press.
Serafini, F. (2013). Reading the visual: An introduction to teaching
multimodal literacy. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Silverman, R. (2007). A comparison of three methods of
vocabulary instruction during read-­alouds in kindergar-
ten. The Elementary School Journal, 108(2), 97–­113. https://doi.
org/10.1086/525549
Sipe, L.R. (2000). The construction of literary understanding
by first and second graders in oral response to picture sto-
rybook read-­alouds. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 252–­
275. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.35.2.4
Smolkin, L., & Donovan, C. (2002). Supporting comprehension
acquisition for emerging and struggling readers: The inter-
active information book read-aloud. Exceptionality, 11(1),
25–­38.
Thoermer, A., & Williams, L. (2012). Using digital texts to pro-
mote fluent reading. The Reading Teacher, 65(7), 441–­4 45.
https://doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01065
Thoermer, A., & Williams, L. (2012). Using digital texts to pro-
mote fluent reading. The Reading Teacher, 65(7), 441–­4 45.
https://doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01065
Trelease, J. (2019). Jim Trelease’s read-­aloud handbook (8th ed.; C.
Giorgis, Ed.). New York, NY: Penguin.
Wiseman, A. (2011). Interactive read alouds: Teachers and
students constructing knowledge and literacy together.
Early Childhood Education Journal, 38(6), 431–­438. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s1064​3-­010-­0 426-­9
Zucker, T.A., Justice, L.M., Piasta, S.B., & Kaderavek, J.N. (2010).
Preschool teachers’ literal and inferential questions and
children’s responses during whole-­c lass shared reading.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25(1), 65–­83. https://doi.org/​
10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.07.001
MORE TO EXPLORE
■■ “Abrams, HarperCollins, and Peachtree extend
permission for readalouds to June 30”: https://www.slj.
com/?detai​lStor ​y=remot​e-­learn​ing-­still​-­the-­norm-­
publi​shers​-­exten​d-­permi​ssion​s-­for-­read-­aloud​
s-­COVID​-­19 (This article provides details about relaxed
copyright laws during the COVID-­19 pandemic.)
■■ “Read Aloud America: Recommended Books”: www.
readaloudamerica.org/booklist.htm (This website
offers lists of recommended read-­aloud books by year
and age.)
■■ “Read to Me International”: https://www.readt​omein​
tl.org/resou​rces/ (This website offers lists of
recommended books by age and topic along with
other virtual resources for educators working in digital
classrooms.)
■■ “Treasury of Recommended Read-­Alouds” in Jim
Trelease’s Read-­Aloud Handbook. (This book provides
lists of recommended read-­aloud books by genre.)

Bridge Research
to Practice:
Live With the Author
Get the inside scoop about Reading Research
Quarterly articles from the authors who wrote
them. Check out these podcasts and videos to
learn about each author’s background; find out
what the author would tell teachers, parents,
principals, policymakers, and other stakeholders
based on the study’s findings; and more!

literacyworldwide.org/rrqauthorinterviews

756
The Reading Teacher   Vol. 74   No. 6   May/June 2021literacyworldwide.org