Research Blog Post #3- Somebody Wanted But So (Then)… What does that even mean!?

In Chapter 3 of Rigor by Design, Not Chance by Karin Hess, she discusses how building on existing schema, we can develop upon even more “sophisticated” schema. The one I am going to be highlighting from the reading is “Structural Schema”. The text goes on to talk about the SWBS chart and how it helps develop structural schema. What is a SWBS chart you might ask? Well, let’s dive a little deeper into that. 

The SWBS chart stands for Somebody, Wanted, But, So, and it refers to a model that many teachers use when explaining the process of summarizing to students. Somebody (S) refers to a character or characters within a story. Wanted (W) refers to what that character wants, whether that be something they want in their position (object, person, animal, etc) or something that they want to do. But (B) refers to the problem of the story and how that problem was caused. So (S) refers to the resolution of the story and how the problem was resolved.

As a Title Reading teacher, this is a model that I am very familiar with and it has helped my students greatly in their development of their own summarizing skills. Something I have noticed is that students often struggle with finding the right words to explain their thinking. This framework is a great way for students to think about the story and how they can use their own words to retell the story. I remember as a young student myself, I used to go overboard with summarizing and I would retell the whole story because I didn’t want to leave anything important out. SWBS does a great job of providing students with a “mental map” for their own thinking. 

Another aspect that Hess addresses in the text is sketchnoting. She connects this to SWBS by explaining that a great way to differentiate for younger students is by allowing them to draw pictures to show key concepts from a story instead of writing it out which is a great way to introduce summarizing before diving into a whole lesson about SWBS where the teacher leads the group in what to write for each component. Hess (2017) goes on to explain the framework by stating, “When students begin to write their own stories, they now have a simple schema, or framework, to guide them in knowing what to include” (p. 108). At first, I didn’t even think about how this is a great tool for writing narratives as well. Writing can be overwhelming for students and this is a great way to support students during the prewriting process where they are organizing and mapping out their ideas for writing. It basically serves as the “bones” for their writing. Hess shows that this model is great to support students’ development of both their reading comprehension skills, and their writing skills. This chart can be differentiated to support struggling readers and above grade-level readers. By this, I mean that for struggling readers, it might be beneficial to focus on one aspect of SWBS at a time and then add upon it as students start to understand it better. It can also challenge above grade-level students when teachers take time to introduce more complex vocabulary such as setting, protagonist, conflict, theme, etc. and students can apply these terms when using the framework to read or write stories. All students can benefit from explicit instruction about the SWBS model and how it can be used to support developing readers and writers.

An article I found by Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. addresses the SWBS(T) framework and describes how readers and writers can use it. The article starts off by describing the framework and discussing where and when to use it. Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. expands on Hess’ ideas by discussing how the model can be used with specific narrative genres such as a picture book, short story, myth, legend, or even an animated video and explicit instruction and examples should be used during whole-group instruction. I appreciated how Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. addressed similar concepts as Hess did, but then added on to them. Another way Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. expanded on Hess’ ideas is by adding the “T” to SWBS(T) which stands for “Then”. This is the model I specifically use in my classroom.

Differently for Hess, Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. outlines So (S) and Then (T) in a slightly different way. Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. (2023) states the meanings of So and Then by writing, “So outlines the events that worsen the problem through rising action. Then reveals how the problem is ultimately solved/resolved”. I liked how the author of this article did that because it provides just a bit more information about the plot in order to make it meaningful.

Oftentimes in stories, the main character(s) will not be able to solve the problem right away. Using “So” as described by Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. allows student readers and writers to talk about how the problem was not solved right away. Let’s take The Big Bad Wolf for example. The story is outlined below:

Somebody	Wanted	But	So	Then
The Big Bad Wolf	Wanted to eat the pigs	They kept hiding in new homes made of straw, sticks, and brick.	The wolf blew down all of the houses, except the one made of brick.	The pigs were safe and the Big Bad Wolf couldn’t eat them.

In the “So” section, you can see how there were events leading up to the resolution, then the “Then” section states the resolution of the story. Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. (2023) states, “Where the summary can be extended is often found within the story’s rising action”. This is the “So” part of the story leading up to the resolution that can be incorporated into the summary of a story. With this model, students are able to include a bit more detail to their summaries without going overboard.

The article goes on to discuss appropriate dialog to use with students when explaining the SWBST model. Personally, I believe that using the specific words “somebody”, “wanted”, “but”, “so” and “then” is necessary, especially for younger students who do not yet have access to other transitional words. Using these specific words is also important for struggling readers who are still learning how to summarize. Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. talks about how students shouldn’t use such simplistic terms. Instead, Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. (2023) states, “Therefore, deliver a lesson on how to revise the content generated by the frame. Teach them how to vary the sentence beginnings, adjust the sentence structures, and punctuate the different pieces of information. This will produce a strong and sophisticated narrative summary that takes SWBST to a whole new level”. I agree that this is important to teach students, but they must first have a strong foundation and understanding of the SWBST framework before they are taught about different transitional words and phrases.

The author of this article goes into detail about the instruction process of how to teach this concept Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. then talks about the release from whole group instruction. After repeated practice in whole-group instruction, students should then move on to small-group instruction led by the teacher. In small groups, students should practice orally using the SWBST model to give a summary of different texts. During this, the teacher will write down what students say into the SWBST chart so they can visually see the summary they are developing. After small-group practice, students will be able to practice during literacy stations. Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. specifically described stations that will help students develop their understanding of the SWBST model. These are the stations stated:

Listening Station—Students listen to a text and orally summarize it using the pocket-chart cards.

Fluency Station—Partners read and orally summarize a text using the pocket-chart cards.

Classroom Library—After reading, students individually summarize key details orally using the cards and/or in writing using the graphic organizer.

I feel as though these stations would be beneficial for students because they allow students to complete work with necessary supports they may need. For example, struggling readers would benefit from listening to a story instead of reading, and they would benefit from working with a partner to support their understanding. During the “Classroom Library” station, teachers might instead take struggling readers into a small group to give them more practice with the SWBST model for summarizing. On the other hand, this instructional lesson plan also allows students who are above grade level readers to show their understanding through independent work (Classroom Library station). Students could even be challenged further by filling out their own SWBST chart. Overall, the author gives great details and information about the SWBST model and how to teach and use it within the classroom.

Both authors use the SWBS(T) model to help students develop “Structural Schema”. Developing structural schema allows students to organize their thinking when reading and writing narrative stories. In other words, students create their own “logic chain” with important details that will either help them organize their thoughts for writing, or it will help them organize their thinking of a read text. I liked how the article I found expanded on Hess’ ideas by adding more content and by explaining a way the SWBS(T) model can be taught within a classroom setting. Both Rigor by Design, Not Chance by Karin Hess and the article “Summarize stories with Somebody, Wanted, But, So, Then” by Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. help educators understand how the SWBS(T) can be used and how students can benefit from instruction about this model.

References:

Hess, K. (2023). Rigor by Design, Not Chance: Deeper Thinking Through Actionable Instruction and Assessment. ASCD.

Summarize stories with Somebody, Wanted, But, So, Then. Smekens Education Solutions, Inc. (2023, September 19). https://www.smekenseducation.com/summarize-stories-with-somebody-wanted-but-so-then/