Language Level Alignment Matrix

Novice-Low

Isolated, high-frequency words or memorized chunks that are highly contextualized. Output functions primarily as labels rather than messages.

Naming and labeling concrete entities

• Learn and use names for concrete objects, actions, or observable things

Word collection: A set of vocabulary terms linked to concrete people, objects, or visible actions; people, objects, and actions exist independently, without added detail or explanation. Not a model of facts.

• Students will name and identify key entities or actions related to the topic using word banks or visual supports.
• Students will sort and label related terms to show category membership.

• What is this?
• Point to the ___.
• Name three things you see.

Novice-Mid

Contextually appropriate words and short phrases. Meaning is conveyed through labels and basic predication, but grammar is inconsistent and utterances are often fragmentary.

Naming and attributing:

• Name concrete attributes, actions, or states associated with an entity, without forming full propositions

Descriptive bundles: Entities in the model are grouped by shared attributes (what something is like, what it does), but are not yet organized into complete facts or statements.

• Students will describe entities using simple attribute or action phrases (is / has / does).
• Students will match entities to properties or actions using short phrases or fragments.

• What kind of ___?
• Which word fits here?
• Describe it with two words.
• Complete: It is ___ / It has ___.

Novice-High

Consistent production of complete simple sentences. Each sentence expresses a single, observable idea; sentences are not yet organized or meaningfully connected.

Asserting observable facts as complete propositions

• State what is explicitly present using complete simple sentences, without inference, explanation, or linkage

Collections of single facts: Complete, self-contained statements about what is visible or explicitly stated; each fact stands alone and is not connected to other facts.

• Students will produce complete simple sentences that describe what an entity does or what happens to it.
• Students will describe a single observable fact using one complete sentence.

• What is happening here?
• Who is this? What are they doing?
• Where is this taking place?
• What happens next?

Intermediate-Low

Strings or lists of sentences about a single, general topic. Sentences accumulate information but are not yet meaningfully connected; order is flexible. Paragraphs may exist by convention (e.g., “five sentences about…”), functioning as collections of facts rather than organized explanations.

Concrete inferential:

• Extend observable details into additional factual attributes;
• Infer additional concrete facts or attributes from observable details without organizing them into causal or temporal chains*

Fact clusters: Multiple related facts about the same person, object, or situation; concrete facts accumulate and may be inferred from one another, but are not yet ordered, sequenced, or explained.

• Students will describe a person, object, or situation using multiple related sentences that stay focused on the same topic.
• Students will refer back to the same idea using simple reference words (it, this, he, she).

• Describe what you see.
• What else do you know, even if it isn’t stated directly?
• What facts can we add about this person or situation?
• What is each character like? What are they doing or trying to do?

Intermediate-Mid

Multiple sentences focused on a single topic, connected through concrete relations such as sequence, cause, or simple comparison. Sentences are meaningfully ordered (they cannot be freely rearranged); cohesion relies on basic but purposeful connectors (because, so, then, but).

Process / causal reasoning:

• Explain change, sequence, or outcome through a single direct cause or condition
• Explain immediate causes or outcomes within a story, process, or conceptual model using a single causal step

Simple process: A basic “if this happens, then that happens” model; one cause leads to one outcome. Facts can now be expanded through direct causal inference. Low hypothetical value.

• Students will explain why or how an event occurs using a single cause or condition (because, so, if…then).
• Students will compare two related ideas using simple relational language (same, different, more than, but).

• Storyboard or process map with labeled steps
• Why did this happen?
• What caused X?
• What will happen next, and why?
• What is one important difference between X and Y?

Intermediate-High

Short, informal paragraphs with a recognizable internal flow. Ideas are connected across sentences using sequencing, cause, and emerging conditional language; transitions are present but not yet rhetorically controlled.

Process and conditional reasoning:

• Coordinate sequence with simple alternatives
• Explain multi-step processes and explore limited counterfactuals within a defined situation

Multi-step process: A short chain of events in which steps follow one another, and small changes can lead to different results within the same situation. Facts and hypotheticals coexist and continue to expand through multi-step and counterfactual inference.

• Students will explain a process or event in logical sequence across multiple steps.
• Students will predict how an outcome changes when a condition is altered, using conditional language.

• What would happen if ___?
• Explain how each step leads to the next.
• Which change matters most, and why?

Advanced-Low

Organized, paragraph-length discourse with a clear internal structure. Ideas are grouped and developed to support a claim; connectors and transitions signal relationships rather than merely sequence.

Situational world modeling:

• Represent social roles, norms, constraints, and motivations
• Construct and justify a coherent model of the social or situational world implied by the text

Situation model: A mental picture of how a world works, including roles, rules, expectations, motivations, and constraints—not just what happened, but why it makes sense in context. The model now includes generalized patterns of facts and hypotheticals within situations.

• Students will state a claim about a social or textual world and support it with reasons or evidence.
• Students will explain why one interpretation or position is stronger than another.

• What is your claim, and why does it make sense in this context?
• What evidence supports this view?
• Why is this interpretation stronger than another?

Advanced-Low+

Multiple, thematically unified paragraphs. Discourse sustains an argument or explanation across sections; register and stance are emerging. Abstraction and generalization are present, though coherence or precision may break down over extended stretches.

Abstracting patterns and roles across instances

• Reason about types, roles, or patterns by treating specific cases as instances of broader categories

Pattern model: An understanding of how multiple situations fit a shared pattern (roles, themes, structures); individual situations are treated as cases of a broader pattern. Facts are now about types of situations or possible situations, not just individual or concrete situations.

• Students will develop a claim across multiple paragraphs, elaborating or qualifying it as needed.
• Students will acknowledge a limitation, exception, or counter-interpretation and respond to it.

• Can you generalize that idea?
• What is a limitation or exception?
• How would someone reasonably disagree?
• Where else does this pattern appear?

Advanced-Mid

Extended, well-developed paragraphs addressing public or abstract topics beyond immediate experience. Discourse sustains synthesis and generalization across contexts with stable control of register and purpose.

Formal abstract reasoning:

• Coordinate multiple abstract models
• Make reasoned claims by synthesizing abstract patterns across texts, systems, time periods, or contexts

Cross-pattern model: Multiple patterns are compared and combined to explain broader ideas across texts, time periods, or systems. Facts at this level are concern real and hypothetical relationships between patterns (similarities, differences, tensions, and interactions), rather than about individual situations or patterns in isolation.

• Students will connect ideas across texts, contexts, or disciplines to explain a broader pattern.
• Students will synthesize information from multiple sources to evaluate or propose a solution.

• How do these sources or cases relate?
• What broader conclusion can we draw?
• How would this pattern change in a different context?
• What solution follows from this analysis?

Advanced-Mid+

Extended, coherent discourse across multiple paragraphs with clear audience awareness and register control. Abstract, analytical treatment of complex topics; rhetorical structuring and transitions guide interpretation. Occasional non-native patterns may appear but do not impede meaning.

Systemic reasoning:

• Model and coordinate interacting systems with reflexive control
• Analyze, compare, and refine interacting systems while weighing assumptions, perspectives, and long-term effects

System-of-systems model: An understanding of how multiple systems compare or interact, including trade-offs, perspectives, feedback effects, and long-term consequences. Facts at this level are about system behaviors, e.g., how possible system interactions over time may and do produce emergent outcomes, unintended effects, and shifting constraints.

• Students will analyze a complex issue using abstract language and sustained, system-level reasoning.
• Students will revise or refine an argument to improve precision, clarity, or impact for a specific audience.

• What assumptions underlie this argument?
• How could this be framed more precisely for a different audience?
• What unintended consequences follow from this system?