Making It Work With Expository Text (for Upper Elementary + Secondary)

Expository text can absolutely work in literacy-based therapy with older students. I use the same five-step framework, but I make a few simple swaps. I change Pre-Story Knowledge Activation to Pre-Reading Knowledge Activation. I swap the story grammar organizer for a graphic organizer that matches the structure of the text. I keep shared reading and focused skill activities the same. Then, instead of a parallel story, I have students recreate or repurpose what they read through something more age-appropriate, like a newscast, a debate, or a narrative inspired by the article. The framework does not fundamentally change. The goal is still multiple meaningful exposures, contextualized language-rich therapy, and activities that connect to a student’s school day.

How to Use Expository Text in Literacy-Based Therapy for Older Students

If you have ever looked at a literacy-based therapy framework and thought, “This makes sense for stories, but what do I do with nonfiction?” you are not alone. I hear that question a lot, especially from SLPs working with upper elementary and secondary students.

When students get older, their school day shifts. They are listening to lectures. They are reading textbooks. They are expected to pull information from science articles, social studies passages, classroom handouts, and all kinds of nonfiction materials. If I want therapy to feel relevant, I need to keep that reality in mind.

That is why I love using expository text. It gives me a way to target comprehension, vocabulary, inferencing, executive function, and social language in a context that actually matches what students are doing in class. It is a simple way to keep therapy functional while still making it engaging. That is working smarter, not harder.

Key takeaway: Older students do not need a completely different framework. They just need a few thoughtful adaptations.

Why Expository Text Belongs in Therapy for Upper Elementary and Secondary Students

One of the biggest wins with expository text is that it helps me start with generalization in mind. I am not targeting skills in isolation. I am embedding them in a task that looks and feels a lot more like the student’s actual day.

Students in upper elementary, middle school, and high school spend so much time trying to comprehend information that is presented through reading, discussion, lecture, and class activities. They have to organize ideas, figure out the main point, hold onto supporting details, and explain what they learned. Those are the exact kinds of language demands that show up in therapy goals.

When I use expository text, I can give students multiple meaningful exposures to the same vocabulary, concepts, and language structures. We activate background knowledge. We read and discuss. We organize information. We use that information again in a new task. That repetition is powerful because it is tied to meaning, not busy work.

I also think expository text opens up a world of options. If a student is not connecting with a traditional story-based activity, I am not stuck. I can pull from science, social studies, career exploration, classroom materials, or high-interest articles. That makes it much easier to find something that actually resonates with the group in front of me.

Real academic relevance matters

For older students, relevance matters. A lot. If a text feels too young, they know it. If an activity feels disconnected from their world, they know that too.

That is why I do not want to rely on picture books for the vast majority of students as they move into the higher grades. Instead, I want to use texts that feel age-appropriate and connected to their curriculum, interests, and communication needs. When I make that shift, I usually get better buy-in and better discussion.

Key takeaway: Expository text gives older students contextualized support in a format that fits their real academic demands.

My Five-Step Adaptation for Expository Text

I still use the same overall literacy-based therapy framework. I just make a few strategic changes. You can think of this as the “Expository Text Adaptation Method.” The heart of the framework stays the same. I am simply changing the pieces that are tied to story structure.

Step 1: Shift to Pre-Reading Knowledge Activation

In a story-based framework, Step 1 is often called Pre-Story Knowledge Activation. For expository text, I just rename it Pre-Reading Knowledge Activation.

This is a small change, but it helps me stay focused on the purpose of the task. We are not getting ready for a story. We are getting ready to read an article or informational text.

At this stage, I still want students thinking, predicting, and connecting. I might use a KWL chart. I might look at the topic of the article and ask students what they already know. I might have them skim the title, headings, pictures, or first few lines. The goal is to get their brains moving before we dive in.

This is also where I use what I call the “Structure-Matched Organizer Strategy.” Instead of pulling out a story grammar organizer, I use a graphic organizer that matches the structure of the text. If the article is built around main idea and details, that is the organizer I use. If it is compare and contrast, cause and effect, sequence, or problem and solution, I match the organizer to that structure.

That one move makes a huge difference. Students are not just predicting random details. They are learning how to organize the type of information they are actually going to encounter.

• Look at the title and topic
• Skim pictures or headings if the text includes them
• Activate background knowledge with a KWL chart or quick discussion
• Predict the main idea and possible supporting details
• Choose a graphic organizer that matches the text structure

Key takeaway: In Step 1, I keep the routine but shift the focus from story structure to text structure.

Step 2: Shared Reading Stays the Same

This is the easy part. Shared reading does not need to change.

We read the article. We pause to talk. We clarify vocabulary. We ask questions. We notice important details. We model thinking. All of that still works beautifully with expository text.

Sometimes I read the passage aloud and stop to think out loud. Sometimes we take turns. Sometimes I chunk the text into smaller parts so the students can process as we go. The delivery might vary based on the group, but the purpose does not change.

I still want reading to be active. I still want students engaging with the language. I still want them making meaning instead of passively hearing words go by.

If I have students who need more support, I can slow the pace and build in more discussion. If I have students who are ready for more independence, I can ask them to take the lead in identifying the main point, noticing signal words, or adding information to the organizer as we read.

Key takeaway: Shared reading still works. The text changed, but the interactive reading process did not.

Step 3: Change Post-Story Comprehension to Post-Reading Comprehension

In Dr. Ukrainetz’s framework, Step 3 is Post-Story Comprehension. For expository text, I change that to Post-Reading Comprehension.

Again, this is not a huge reinvention. It is a targeted swap. We skip the story grammar organizer because it is not relevant, and we go back to the same structure-matched graphic organizer we introduced in Step 1.

This consistency helps students in a big way. They saw the organizer before reading. They used it to make predictions. Now they use it again to sort and summarize what they actually learned. That gives them a clear bridge from background knowledge to comprehension.

I love this step because it makes abstract information much more manageable. Instead of asking students to hold the whole article in their heads, I am giving them a visual framework for organizing the information. That can support everything from answering comprehension questions to retelling the main points to explaining the content to someone else.

This step is also a great place to target inferencing and flexible thinking. Students can compare what they predicted to what they actually read. They can identify missing information. They can revise their thinking. That is powerful language work.

Key takeaway: Post-reading comprehension becomes much easier when students have a visual organizer that matches the way the text is built.

Step 4: Focused Skill Activities Stay the Same

Step 4 is where I target the student’s specific goals, and I do not need to change that just because the text is expository.

I can still work on vocabulary. I can still work on sentence formulation, syntax, inferencing, summarizing, describing, comparing, perspective taking, executive function, and so much more. The difference is that now I am doing it with language pulled from the article or activity we already explored together.

That context matters. Students are not being asked to jump into a disconnected drill. They are using familiar content from the shared reading experience. That usually makes it easier for them to stay engaged and to see how the skill applies beyond the therapy room.

For example, if we read a science article, we can target tiered vocabulary, category relationships, and explaining cause and effect. If we use a procedural or informational text, we can target sequencing, describing, and predicting. If the topic sparks discussion, we can target conversation skills, perspective taking, and organizing verbal responses.

This is where expository text becomes incredibly flexible. One article can support a mixed group really well because the shared context stays the same, even if each student’s goal looks a little different.

Key takeaway: Expository text gives me a shared context for individualized goals, which is one reason it works so well for mixed groups.

Step 5: Replace the Parallel Story With a Repurposing Task

This is the other big adaptation. In the story-based framework, Step 5 is a Parallel Story. With expository text, I replace that with what I think of as the “Repurpose the Summary Strategy.”

Instead of asking students to create a parallel story, I ask them to recreate or repurpose the summary of what they read in a way that feels more age-appropriate.

This is one of my favorite parts of the process because it gives students a reason to use the information again. They are not just answering a few questions and moving on. They are taking what they learned and doing something with it.

• Record a newscast
• Have a debate
• Create a narrative inspired by the article
• Teach the information to a partner or small group
• Turn the content into a quick presentation or recap

I especially love the newscast idea. It is engaging, it feels more mature, and it gives students a natural reason to summarize key information clearly. A debate can also be a great fit when the topic lends itself to opinions, problem solving, or multiple viewpoints.

What I like most about this step is that it keeps the spirit of the framework intact. Students are still revisiting the content. They are still practicing language in a meaningful way. It just looks different because the text type is different.

Key takeaway: The final step should feel age-appropriate and purposeful. Repurposing the summary does exactly that.

Where to Find Good Expository Texts for Speech Therapy

Once you start thinking beyond picture books, you will realize there are so many good options.

I like to look for texts that are high-interest, relevant to the curriculum, and flexible enough to support the goals I am targeting. I do not need the perfect article. I just need a solid text that fits the group.

My favorite sources for older students

• ReadWorks articles: These are some of my favorite options because they include both fiction and nonfiction, and you can find high-interest passages that connect to classroom content.
• Classroom articles and handouts: If students are already working with a text in class, that can be a great place to start.
• Textbooks: Short sections from science, social studies, or health texts can work really well.
• Chapter book passages: If the class is reading a text with informational sections or strong academic language, I can pull from that too.
• Science experiments: These are so fun, and they create natural opportunities for prediction, sequencing, collaboration, and explaining.
• Vocational videos and functional communication materials: These can be a great fit for older students, especially when I want the content to feel practical and relevant.

If I am using a fiction article or short story, I can still use the story-based framework. I only make these modifications when I am working with expository text. That distinction is helpful because it keeps me from overcomplicating the planning process.

Key takeaway: You probably already have access to better expository texts than you think.

How I Decide Which Text Fits the Group Best

At the end of the day, clinical judgment drives which text fits your group best. That line is worth repeating because it takes the pressure off trying to find one perfect answer.

You know your students. You know what will resonate. You know which topics will get them talking and which ones will flop. You know how much support they need, how much background knowledge they have, and how far you can stretch them without losing them.

When I am choosing a text, I run it through a simple “Best Fit Filter.”

• Is it age-appropriate?
• Is it relevant to the student’s school day, interests, or goals?
• Does it have a clear structure I can support with an organizer?
• Can I use it to target the goals in this group?
• Will it create opportunities for meaningful discussion or repurposing?

If the answer is yes to most of those questions, it is probably a good option.

I also try to remember that older students often feel like they do not have a lot of options. That is simply not true. When I use literacy-based therapy with expository text, the options multiply quickly. I can pull from the curriculum. I can use a science experiment. I can use a ReadWorks article. I can use vocational materials. I can build a session around a topic the students are already hearing about in class. There is so much to work with.

And if you are ever feeling stuck, that does not mean you are doing anything wrong. Sometimes it just means you need a framework for sorting through the options. That is one reason I love systems. They make it easier to make good decisions without reinventing everything from scratch.

A Simple Recap of the Main Takeaways

If you want to make literacy-based therapy work with expository text, you do not need to throw out the framework. You just need to adapt the parts that are tied to story structure.

• Change Pre-Story Knowledge Activation to Pre-Reading Knowledge Activation.
• Use a graphic organizer that matches the structure of the text.
• Keep shared reading and focused skill activities the same.
• Change Post-Story Comprehension to Post-Reading Comprehension.
• Replace the parallel story with an age-appropriate repurposing task, like a newscast or debate.

The framework does not fundamentally change. The principles still apply. I am still giving students multiple meaningful exposures. I am still keeping therapy contextualized and language-rich. I am still thinking about generalization from the start.

And maybe most importantly, I am using materials that make sense for older students. That one shift can open up a world of options.

If you have been wondering how to make nonfiction or informational text fit into your sessions, I hope this gives you a simple place to start. Trust your judgment, keep the structure, and make the small tweaks that help the framework match the text in front of you.

Transcript

---

FAQ