Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 100

Critical Reflections on Theory and Research Related to Comprehension Strategies Instruction PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 43 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Critical Reflections on Theory and Research Related to Comprehension Strategies Instruction. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D. Carol Lee Robertson Endowed Professor of Literacy University of Kentucky [email protected] Contact Information.

Download Presentation

Critical Reflections on Theory and Research Related to Comprehension Strategies Instruction

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Critical Reflections on Theory and Research Related to Comprehension Strategies Instruction

Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D.

Carol Lee Robertson Endowed Professor of Literacy

University of Kentucky

[email protected]


Contact information

Contact Information

  • For further information about this presentation please contact:

    Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D.

    Carol Lee Robertson Endowed Professor of Literacy

    University of Kentucky

    101 Taylor Education Building

    Lexington, KY 40506

    [email protected]

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Almasi, J. F., & Fullerton, S. K. (2012). Teaching strategic processes in reading (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

What are Strategies?

“Strategies are actions an individual selects deliberately to attain a particular goal.”

--Almasi & Fullerton (2012, p. 1)

“Reading strategies are deliberate, goal-directed attempts to control and modify the reader’s efforts to decode text, understand words, and construct meanings of text.”

--Afflerbach, Pearson, & Paris (2008, p. 368)

Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P. D., & Paris, S. G. (2008). Clarifying the differences between reading skills and strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 364-373.

Almasi, J. F., & Fullerton, S. K. (2012). Teaching strategic processes in reading (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P. D., & Paris, S. G. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 364-373.


Comprehension research

Comprehension Research

Where We’ve Been

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Comprehension research where we ve been pearson 2009

Comprehension Research: Where We’ve Been (Pearson, 2009)

Cognitive

Revolution

  • Readers viewed as active participants in meaning construction process.

  • Experimental studies offered promising findings showing strategies-based interventions were successful at enhancing comprehension.

Comprehension

Not valued except

as a step toward text

memorization

1975

Pearson, P. D. (2009). The roots of reading comprehension instruction. In S. E. Israel & G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of reading comprehension research (pp. ). New York: Routledge.


Observational research 1970s

Observational Research: 1970s

  • Durkin (1978/1979)

    • Paucity of actual comprehension instruction in elementary classrooms.

    • Great amount of time was spent:

      • “Mentioning” (i.e., mentioning the skill students were supposed to practice)

      • “Practicing” (i.e., practicing the skill)

      • “Assessing” (i.e., giving directions to complete assignments and workbook pages)

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Expert novice studies 1980s

Expert/Novice Studies: 1980s

Expert Readers

Novice Readers

Focus on decoding individual words

Cannot adjust their reading rate

Are not aware of alternate strategies for enhancing their comprehension and memory of text

Are not adept at monitoring their own comprehension

  • Have rapid decoding skills

  • Have large vocabularies

  • Know a variety of strategies to enhance comprehension and memory of text

  • Know about text features and text structures

  • Have good phonemic awareness

Source: Paris, S. G., Wasik, B. A., & Turner, J. C. (1991). The development of strategic readers. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, and P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. II, pp. 609-640). New York: Longman.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Fig. 1.5, p. 11

Possess a variety

of strategies for

accomplishing

tasks

Good Strategy Users

(Pressley, 1986,1989)

Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21, 139-161.

Pressley, M., Symons, S., Snyder, B. L., & Cariglia-Bull, T. (1989). Strategy instruction comes of age. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 16-30.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Fig. 1.5, p. 11

Possess a variety

of strategies for

accomplishing

tasks

Good Strategy Users

(Pressley, 1986,1989)

Use Primitive

Routines

Nonstrategic Readers

(Garner, 1987)

Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Fig. 1.5, pp. 11, 19

Possess a variety

of strategies for

accomplishing

tasks

Are able to

analyze reading

tasks to plan and

select strategies

Good Strategy Users

(Pressley, 1986,1989)

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21, 139-161.

Pressley, M., Symons, S., Snyder, B. L., & Cariglia-Bull, T. (1989). Strategy instruction comes of age. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 16-30.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Unable to Transfer

Strategy Use

To New Contexts

Uses Primitive

Routines

Good Strategy Users

(Pressley, 1986, 1989)

pp. 22-23

Nonstrategic Readers

(Garner, 1987)

Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21, 139-161.

Pressley, M., Symons, S., Snyder, B. L., & Cariglia-Bull, T. (1989). Strategy instruction comes of age. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 16-30.

Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Possess a variety

of strategies for

accomplishing

tasks

Are able to

analyze reading

tasks to plan and

select strategies

Are motivated to

use strategies

and have agency

Fig. 1.5, pp. 11-14

Good Strategy Users

(Pressley, 1986, 1989)

Persist

Confident

Attribute Success to Effort

Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21, 139-161.

Pressley, M., Symons, S., Snyder, B. L., & Cariglia-Bull, T. (1989). Strategy instruction comes of age. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 16-30.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Unable to Transfer

Strategy Use

To New Contexts

Uses Primitive

Routines

p. 23

Personal

attributions

do not support

strategy use

Give Up

Unconfident

Nonstrategic Readers

(Garner, 1987)

Attribute Success to Luck

Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Possess a variety

of strategies for

accomplishing

tasks

Are able to

analyze reading

tasks to plan and

select strategies

Are motivated to

employ strategies

and have agency

Good Strategy Users

(Pressley, 1986, 1989)

Fig. 1.5, pp. 11-13

Table 6.1, pp. 148-151

Table 7.3, pp. 236-237

Possess an extensive

knowledge base:

• Declarative

• Procedural

• Conditional

Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21, 139-161.

Pressley, M., Symons, S., Snyder, B. L., & Cariglia-Bull, T. (1989). Strategy instruction comes of age. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 16-30.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Unable to Transfer

Strategy Use

To New Contexts

Uses Primitive

Routines

Good Strategy Users

(Pressley, 1986, 1989)

Personal

attributions

do not support

strategy use

pp. 22-23

Possess an extensive

knowledge base:

• Declarative (What)

• Procedural (How)

• Conditional (Why)

Meager

knowledgebase

Nonstrategic Readers

(Garner, 1987)

Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21, 139-161.

Pressley, M., Symons, S., Snyder, B. L., & Cariglia-Bull, T. (1989). Strategy instruction comes of age. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 16-30.

Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Unable to Transfer

Strategy Use

To New Contexts

Uses Primitive

Routines

Personal

attributions

do not support

strategy use

pp. 22-23

I don’t know how to do it!

Meager

knowledgebase

Nonstrategic Readers

(Garner, 1987)

What am I supposed to do?

I don’t know when or why I should use this!

Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Possess a variety

of strategies for

accomplishing

tasks

Are able to

analyze reading

tasks to plan and

select strategies

Are motivated to

use strategies

and have agency

Good Strategy Users

(Pressley, 1986, 1989)

Fig. 1.5, p. 11

Possess an extensive

knowledge base:

• Declarative

• Procedural

• Conditional

Make use of

metacognitive factors

to regulate and

monitor comprehension

and performance

Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21, 139-161.

Pressley, M., Symons, S., Snyder, B. L., & Cariglia-Bull, T. (1989). Strategy instruction comes of age. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 16-30.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Unable to Transfer

Strategy Use

To New Contexts

Uses Primitive

Routines

Personal

attributions

do not support

strategy use

pp. 22-23

Poor cognitive

monitoring and

metacognition

Meager

knowledgebase

Nonstrategic Readers

(Garner, 1987)

Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.


Comprehension research where we ve been

Comprehension Research: Where We’ve Been

  • First Wave

    • Teach students individual strategies

      (e.g., predicting, monitoring, questioning, summarizing)

  • Second Wave

    • Teach students to use multiple strategies (e.g., reciprocal teaching)

Sources: Dole, Nokes &Drits (2009); Pressley (2000); Wilkinson & Son (2011)


Explicit instruction studies 1980s

Explicit Instruction Studies : 1980s

  • Examined effect of providing comprehension instruction for students

  • That body of research revealed that explicit instruction enhances students’ learning and their strategic and metacognitive awareness, particularly for struggling readers (e.g., Dole, Duffy, Roehler, & Pearson, 1991; Dole, Brown, & Trathen, 1996; Duffy, et al., 1987; Duke & Pearson, 2002; Pearson & Fielding, 1991; Pearson & Dole, 1987).

  • Little comprehension instruction still occurs in elementary classrooms (Fielding & Pearson, 1994; Pearson, & Dole, 1987; Pearson & Fielding, 1991; Pearson & Gallagher, 1983; Pressley, 2000)

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Explicit instruction pearson dole 1987 pearson gallagher 1983

Explicit Instruction(Pearson & Dole, 1987; Pearson & Gallagher, 1983)

Declarative Knowledge

What is it?

Explanation

  • Explicit

  • Instruction

  • Direct Explanation

  • In authentic context

  • Encourages flexible

  • strategy use

  • Gradually release

  • responsibility from

  • teacher to student

How do I do it?

Procedural Knowledge

Where, when, why should I do it?

Conditional

Knowledge

Modeling/Thinking Aloud

Guided Practice

Independence

Pearson, P. D., & Dole, J. A. (1987). Explicit comprehension instruction: A review of research and a new conceptualization of instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 88(2), 151-165.

Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 317-344.


Seminal early studies

Seminal Early Studies

  • Dole, Nokes, and Drits (2009) identified two studies that changed the face of reading instruction and provided a glimpse of what true strategies instruction could look like

    • Duffy, Roehler, Meloth, Vavrus, Book, Putnam, & Wesselman, (1986)

    • Duffy, Roehler, Sivan, Rackliffe, Book, Meloth, Vavrus, Wesselman, Putnam, & Bassiri(1987)

  • When teachers provided explicit explanations of what strategies were, when they should be used, why they should be used, and how to perform them students’ reading achievement on standardized, non-standardized and maintenance measures improved.

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Comprehension research where we ve been1

Comprehension Research: Where We’ve Been

  • Third Wave

    • Transactional Strategies Instruction (extended multiple strategies instruction to include flexible strategy use while readers transact with text)

Sources: Wilkinson, I. A. G., & Son, E. H. (2011). A dialogic turn in research on learning and teaching to comprehend. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 4, pp. 359-387). New York: Routledge.


Research based evidence

Research-Based Evidence

  • Brown, Pressley, Van Meter, & Schuder (1996)

    • 60 2nd grade low achieving students

    • 1 year intervention (SAIL, non-SAIL)

Measures

▪ Strategies Interview

▪ Retellings

▪ Think Aloud Task

▪ Standardized Test of Reading Comprehension and Word Skills (Stanford Achievement Test, Forms J and K)

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

Brown, R., Pressley, M., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1996). A quasi-experimental validation of transactional strategies instruction with low-achieving second-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 18-37.


Treatment conditions brown pressley van meter schuder 1996

Treatment Conditions(Brown, Pressley, Van Meter & Schuder, 1996)

Brown, R., Pressley, M., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1996). A quasi-experimental validation of transactional strategies instruction with low-achieving second-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 18-37.


Results brown pressley van meter schuder 1996

Results (Brown, Pressley, Van Meter & Schuder, 1996)

Brown, R., Pressley, M., Van Meter, P., & Schuder, T. (1996). A quasi-experimental validation of transactional strategies instruction with low-achieving second-grade readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 18-37.

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Measures of Comprehension

6 Tests covering material from each of the 6 basal reading selections:

10 Comprehension Questions (maximum score = 30)

▪ 4 questions (vocabulary and content-specific declarative knowledge)

▪ 2 questions (story’s central problem and resolution)

▪ 4 questions (literal and inferential related to important events in selection)

2 Tests before instruction

2 Tests during instructional sequence

2 Tests given 7 weeks after instruction ended

  • Dole, Brown, & Trathen (1996)

    • 67 fifth and sixth-grade at-risk readers

    • 5 week intervention

Dole, J. A., Brown, K. J., & Trathen, W. (1996). The effects of strategy instruction on the comprehension performance of at-risk students. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(1), 62-88.


Results dole brown trathen 1996

Results (Dole, Brown & Trathen, 1996)

Dole, J. A., Brown, K. J., & Trathen, W. (1996). The effects of strategy instruction on the comprehension performance of at-risk students. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(1), 62-88.

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


U s dept of ed recommendations whatworks ed gov publications practiceguides

U.S. Dept. of Ed. Recommendationswhatworks.ed.gov/publications/practiceguides

STRONG EVIDENCE

Teach Students How to Use

Comprehension Strategies

Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Schatschneider, C., & Torgesen, J. (2010). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten through 3rd grade: A practice guide (NCEE 2010-4038). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from whatworks.ed.gov/publications/practiceguides.


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Critical Elements of Strategy Instruction Model(Almasi & Fullerton, 2012)

Enhances Personal Attributions and Motivation

Fig. 2.1, pp. 36-57

Create a Safe and Risk Free Environment to Enhance Motivation and Risk Taking

Enhances Motivation, Knowledge, Monitoring, and Transfer to New Contexts

Enhances Knowledge Overcomes: - Meager knowledge base

- Use of primitive routines

- Poor Comp Monitoring

Provide Explicit Instruction

Create Opportunities for Student Verbalization

Reduce Processing Demands

Enhances Motivation, Knowledge, and Transfer to New Contexts

Source: Almasi, J. F., & Fullerton, S, K. (2012). Teaching strategic processes in reading (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford


Comprehension research1

Comprehension Research

Where We Are

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Comprehension research where we are

Comprehension Research: Where We Are

  • Fourth Wave

    • Dialogic Approaches

    • Embed strategy instruction in content domains (e.g., CORI, In-Depth Expanded Application of Science, Reading Apprenticeship)

    • Use classroom discussion to foster comprehension

      • Aesthetic/Expressive Stance (e.g., Book Club, Grand Conversations, Literature Circles)

      • Efferent Stance (e.g., Instruction Conversations, QTA, Jr. Great Books)

      • Argumentation (e.g., Accountable Talk, Collaborative Reasoning)

Sources: Wilkinson, I. A. G., & Son, E. H. (2011). A dialogic turn in research on learning and teaching to comprehend. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 4, pp. 359-387). New York: Routledge.


Content knowledge vs strategy instruction

Content Knowledge vs. Strategy Instruction

  • There is controversy surrounding the efficacy of comprehension strategies instruction for enhancing students' achievement.  Some have argued that content knowledge rather than strategies instruction plays a larger role in achievement.  Others maintain that the process-oriented nature of strategies instruction leads to more efficacious learning.

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Content based approaches

Content-Based Approaches

  • McKeown, Beck, & Blake (2009)

    • Strategy Condition (summarizing, predicting, drawing inferences, question generation, comprehension monitoring)

    • Content Condition (QtA: general meaning-based questions about text)

    • Y1 (Expository text) Y2 (Narrative)

    • Results

      • No difference on SVT measure (Y1 or Y2)

      • Content students produced longer and higher quality recalls (Y1 and Y2)

      • No difference on measures of comprehension monitoring and strategies task (Y1 and Y2)

Participants:

Intact 5th grade classrooms

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

Source: McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., & Blake, R. G. K. (2009). Rethinking reading comprehension instruction: A comparison of instruction for strategies and content approaches. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(3), 218-253.


Worries

Worries . . .

  • Product vs. Process

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

  • Anna Isabella Ritchie, Mrs. Dymond (1885)

  • Chinese Proverb


Worries1

Worries . . .

  • Product vs. Process

  • Participants:

    • Who benefits?

  • Epistemological considerations:

    • What counts as knowledge?

  • Power/Authority:

    • Whose interpretation of text is privileged?

    • Whose “way” of using strategies is privileged?

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Striving readers evaluation

Striving Readers Evaluation

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (2013). Reading intervention in middle and high schools: Implementation fidelity, teacher efficacy, and student achievement. Reading Psychology, 34(1), 26-58.

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Madden, A. (2010). The impact of a strategy-based intervention on the comprehension and strategy use of struggling adolescent readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 257-280.

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (in preparation). The impact of supplemental reading instruction on struggling adolescents’ reading achievement, motivation, and strategy use. Unpublished manuscript.


Lsc impact study

LSC Impact Study

Research Questions

  • 1. What is the impact of the LSC on the reading achievement, strategy use, and motivation of struggling adolescent readers?

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Lsc certification

LSC Certification

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Lsc classroom model

LSC Classroom Model

  • Supplemental Instruction

  • Class Length: 50-90 minutes, 50-60 minutes for LSC (no more than 300 minutes per week)

  • Class Size: 10-15 students


Lsc classroom model1

LSC Classroom Model

Strategies Taught

  • Word Identification

  • Visual Imagery

  • Self-Questioning

  • LINCS Vocabulary Strategy & Routines

  • Fundamentals of Sentence Writing

  • Fundamentals of Paraphrasing and Summarizing

  • Paraphrasing Strategy

  • Inference Strategy

  • Possible Selves

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Critical Elements of Strategy Instruction Model(Almasi & Fullerton, 2012)

Enhances Personal Attributions and Motivation

Fig. 2.1, pp. 36-57

Create a Safe and Risk Free Environment to Enhance Motivation and Risk Taking

Enhances Motivation, Knowledge, Monitoring, and Transfer to New Contexts

Enhances Knowledge Overcomes: - Meager knowledge base

- Use of primitive routines

- Poor Comp Monitoring

Provide Explicit Instruction

Create Opportunities for Student Verbalization

Reduce Processing Demands

Enhances Motivation, Knowledge, and Transfer to New Contexts

Source: Almasi, J. F., & Fullerton, S, K. (2012). Teaching strategic processes in reading (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford


Lsc impact study1

LSC Impact Study

Research Design

  • Multiple Cohort Pretest/Posttest Control Group Design

  • Stratified Random Assignment to Condition within Schools

  • Sixth- and ninth-grade students two or more grades below grade level in 21 rural schools

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Lsc student demographics

LSC Student Demographics

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Student outcome measures

Student Outcome Measures

  • Achievement Test: GRADE

  • Reading Strategies Use Survey: MARSI (Mokhtari & Reichard, 2000)

  • Motivation Survey: MRQ (Wigfield & Guthrie, 1997)

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Lsc analytic approach hierarchical linear models hlm

LSC Analytic Approach:Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM)

  • 2-Level HLM: Students within Schools

School #1

School #2

School #X

Intv

Intv

Control

Control

Intv

Control

Student

Student

Student

Student

Student

Student

Student

Student

Student

Student

Student

Student

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Lsc 6 th grade student achievement y1 and y4 cantrell almasi et al 2010

LSC 6th Grade Student Achievement (Y1 and Y4) (Cantrell, Almasi, et al., 2010)

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Madden, A. (2010). The impact of a strategy-based intervention on the comprehension and strategy use of struggling adolescent readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 257-280.

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (in preparation). The impact of supplemental reading instruction on struggling adolescents’ reading achievement, motivation, and strategy use. Unpublished manuscript.


Lsc implementation

LSC Implementation

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (2013). Reading intervention in middle and high schools: Implementation fidelity, teacher efficacy, and student achievement. Reading Psychology, 34(1), 26-58.


Lsc 9 th grade student achievement y1 and y4 cantrell almasi et al 2010

LSC 9th Grade Student Achievement (Y1 and Y4) (Cantrell, Almasi, et al., 2010)

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Madden, A. (2010). The impact of a strategy-based intervention on the comprehension and strategy use of struggling adolescent readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 257-280.

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (in preparation). The impact of supplemental reading instruction on struggling adolescents’ reading achievement, motivation, and strategy use. Unpublished manuscript.


Lsc 6 th grade student motivation mrq y1 and y4 cantrell almasi et al 2010

LSC 6th Grade Student Motivation (MRQ) Y1 and Y4 (Cantrell, Almasi, et al., 2010)

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Madden, A. (2010). The impact of a strategy-based intervention on the comprehension and strategy use of struggling adolescent readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 257-280.

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (in preparation). The impact of supplemental reading instruction on struggling adolescents’ reading achievement, motivation, and strategy use. Unpublished manuscript.


Lsc 9 th grade student motivation mrq y1 and y4 cantrell almasi et al 2010

LSC 9th Grade Student Motivation (MRQ) Y1 and Y4 (Cantrell, Almasi, et al., 2010)

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Madden, A. (2010). The impact of a strategy-based intervention on the comprehension and strategy use of struggling adolescent readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 257-280.

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (in preparation). The impact of supplemental reading instruction on struggling adolescents’ reading achievement, motivation, and strategy use. Unpublished manuscript.


Striving readers

Striving Readers

Year 5 Follow-Up Study

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Research question

Research Question

  • What are differences in reading achievement and motivation for students who participate in the Learning Strategies Curriculum intervention for two years as compared to students who participate for just one year, when the students still are struggling with reading after one year of intervention?

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


6 th grade achievement

6th Grade Achievement

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Madden, A. (2010). The impact of a strategy-based intervention on the comprehension and strategy use of struggling adolescent readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 257-280.

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (in preparation). The impact of supplemental reading instruction on struggling adolescents’ reading achievement, motivation, and strategy use. Unpublished manuscript.


6 th grade achievement1

6th Grade Achievement

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Madden, A. (2010). The impact of a strategy-based intervention on the comprehension and strategy use of struggling adolescent readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 257-280.

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (in preparation). The impact of supplemental reading instruction on struggling adolescents’ reading achievement, motivation, and strategy use. Unpublished manuscript.


Naep 6 th grade reading scale scores in kentucky 2002 2011

NAEP 6th Grade Reading Scale Scores in Kentucky 2002-2011

16

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Naep 8 th grade reading scale scores in kentucky 2002 2011

NAEP 8th Grade Reading Scale Scores in Kentucky 2002-2011

23

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Lsc conclusions

LSC Conclusions

  • The professional development model was effective in supporting teachers’ implementation of LSC at high levels.

  • The LSC was effective at enhancing students’ reading overall.

  • More specifically, the LSC had a statistically significant impact for 9th grade achievement.

  • The LSC had significant impacts on motivation for both 6th and 9th grades.

  • To a lesser extent, the LSC had a positive effect on 6th grade students’ strategy use.

  • A second year of intervention may be beneficial for 6th graders, particularly minority students and those who are not in Special Education.

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Madden, A. (2010). The impact of a strategy-based intervention on the comprehension and strategy use of struggling adolescent readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 257-280.

Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (in preparation). The impact of supplemental reading instruction on struggling adolescents’ reading achievement, motivation, and strategy use. Unpublished manuscript.


Narrative comprehension project

Narrative Comprehension Project

US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences

Lorch, E., Milich, R., Almasi, J. F., van den Broek, P., & Boyd, A. (2011). A Narrative Comprehension Intervention for Elementary School Children At-Risk for Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder


Children at r isk for adhd

Children At Risk for ADHD

  • Inattentive

  • Impulsive

  • Overactive

  • Off-task

  • Poor short-term memory

  • Empirically validated treatments (i.e., stimulant medication, behavior modification) do not address problems with higher order cognitive processing skills (i.e., comprehension)

  • 1-2 children per classroom

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Rationale

Rationale

  • Impairments are interrelated

  • Appear to result in problems in building coherent, goal-based story representations and in using relevant information and causal structure to guide story recall and inference making.

  • Medication appears to be insufficient to address these problems.

  • Interventions need to be developed that focus on the narrative comprehension deficits that may be contributing to the academic difficulties of children with ADHD.

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Purpose

Purpose

  • The goal of the project is todesign, implement and pilot test targeted academic intervention strategies that can lessen story comprehension difficulties.

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Goal

  • Independent and efficacious use of narrative comprehension strategies in a variety of contexts.

  • To achieve the goal, the instructors will model the use of the strategy and the children will practice the strategy in groups with the instructor’s help (scaffolding) until the instructor has faded scaffolding to the point in which children can use the skills on their own.

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Ways to Gradually Release Cognitive Responsibility

(Almasi & Fullerton, 2012)

Amount of Cognitive Activity Required by Text

Semiotic (Less) Linguistic (More)

EventsMoviesWordlessBooksPicture BooksText

Less

More

Teacher + Class

Small Grp

Trios

Pairs

Individual

Amount of Student’s Cognitive

Responsibility

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

Almasi, J. F., & Fullerton, S. K. (2012). Teaching strategic processes in reading (2nd ed.). New York:

Guilford Press.


Participants

Participants

  • Addresses narrative comprehension difficulties that are separate from any difficulty decoding

  • No decoding demands placed on the children

  • Students at risk for ADHD

  • 2nd and 3rd graders

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Specific areas of difficulty

Specific Areas of Difficulty

  • Understanding the causal relations among story events (Landau, Lorch, & Milich, 1992; Lorch et al., 2000; Lorch et al., 2004; Sanchez et al.,1999)

  • Using the goal structure (GAO) of a story to build a coherent story representation (Flory, Milich, Lorch, Hayden, Strange, & Welsh, 2006; Renz, Lorch, Milich, Lemberger, Bodner, & Welsh, 2003)

  • Recognizing the important information in a story and using this information to guide recall (Flake, Lorch, & Milich, 2007; Lorch, Deiner et al., 1999; Lorch, Lorch, Calderhead, Dunlap, & Freer, 2010; Lorch, O’Neil et al., 2004; and Lorch, Sanchez et al., 1999)

  • Making coherence inferences about story information and monitoring ongoing understanding of the story (Berthiaume, Lorch, & Milich, 2010)

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Critical Elements of Strategy Instruction Model(Almasi & Fullerton, 2012)

Enhances Personal Attributions and Motivation

Fig. 2.1, pp. 36-57

Create a Safe and Risk Free Environment to Enhance Motivation and Risk Taking

Enhances Motivation, Knowledge, Monitoring, and Transfer to New Contexts

Enhances Knowledge Overcomes: - Meager knowledge base

- Use of primitive routines

- Poor Comp Monitoring

Provide Explicit Instruction

Create Opportunities for Student Verbalization

Reduce Processing Demands

Enhances Motivation, Knowledge, and Transfer to New Contexts

Source: Almasi, J. F., & Fullerton, S, K. (2012). Teaching strategic processes in reading (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford


Measures

Measures

  • Ease of mastery for participants

  • Participant ratings and interviews

  • Instructor ratings

  • Feedback from teachers

    • Teacher focus groups in Year 1

    • Ratings and interviews in Years 2 and 3

  • Independent observer ratings

  • Measures of student comprehension efficacy

  • School records and standardized testing measures (years 2 and 3)

  • Pre-test and post-test measures

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Measures of iterative process feasibility factors

Measures of Iterative Process: Feasibility Factors

  • Ease of mastery

  • Usability

  • Difficulty

  • Appeal/Satisfaction

  • Effectiveness

  • Efficacy

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

What we did right now was . . .

Learning how to find goals was . . .

If someone asked me to identify the goal in a story . . .

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Pretest posttest measures

Pretest/Posttest Measures

  • Free recall protocols of television program and audiotaped story

    • important events

    • characters’ goals, actions and outcomes

    • identification of causal connections between event

    • inferences

  • Cued recall of television program and audiotaped story

  • Narration of wordless picture book (identification of initiating events that motivate goals, maintenance of goals by explicitly linking attempts and outcomes to a goal plan, and statements of causal connections and inferences that link events)

  • Creation of stories (evaluated for inclusion of initiating events, goals, maintenance of characters’ goals, and causal connections between story events)

  • Story comprehension self-efficacy

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Instructional lesson framework

Instructional Lesson Framework

Establish Group Rules

Provide Explicit Instruction Using Concrete Activity (Balloon Narrative/Magician Narrative)

Teacher Modeling and Guided Practice with Text (e.g., video, wordless picture book, picture book)

Paired Practice with text

Evaluation #1

Teacher Modeling and Guided Practice with alternate text

Paired Practice

Evaluation #2

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

I want

Making Identifying Goals Concrete

?

ATTEMPT

GOAL

OUTCOME: FAIL

OUTCOME: YES

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Procedural Knowledge Related to Identifying Goal Sequences

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Balloon Narrative

as Ongoing

Concrete

Experience

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

I want

?

Transfer to

Text

ATTEMPT

GOAL

OUTCOME: FAIL

OUTCOME: YES

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

DePaola, T. (1978). Pancakes for breakfast. New York: Harcourt.


Goals for causal connections module

Goals for Causal Connections Module

  • To help student learn to:

    • Identify what causes and events are

    • Identify simple causes and events

    • Identify causal chains

    • Identify causes (and events) and the important events that drive causal chains

    • Identify single cause of multiple events

    • Identify distal causes

    • Identify distal causes that illustrate important events in a story

    • Use causal connections to retell story events

    • Use causal connections to help identify which events in a a story are more important than others

    • Use causal connections to retrieve story events

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Single episode trabasso van den broek 1985

Single Episode (Trabasso & van den Broek, 1985)

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Simple cause event

Simple Cause/Event

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Simple cause event1

Simple Cause/Event

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Successive episodes chaining trabasso van den broek 1985

Successive Episodes (Chaining) (Trabasso & van den Broek, 1985)

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Outcome embedding trabasso van den broek 1985

Outcome Embedding(Trabasso & van den Broek, 1985)

A12

O12

A22

O22

Outcome embedding

depends on success or

failure of goals and if the

outcome leads to the creation

of a new goal . If the outcome is a failure

and leads to a subordinate goal (G21) then

a goal hierarchy results.

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Chaining

Chaining

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Single cause multiple events

Single Cause/Multiple Events

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Distal cause

Distal Cause

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Comprehension research2

Comprehension Research

Where We Need to Go

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


What i have learned

What I Have Learned . . .

  • Comprehension is not a unitary construct

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


Critical reflections on theory and research related to comprehension strategies instruction

Scatterplot of the Relationship between Non-word Reading

and Reading Comprehension for 7 to 10 Year-Old Children

(Nation, 2005)

Good Comprehension

Poor Decoding

Good Comprehension

Good Decoding

Poor Comprehension

Poor Decoding

Poor Comprehension

Good Decoding

Source: Nation, K. (2005). Children’s reading comprehension difficulties. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 248-266). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.


Reading proficiencies of fourth and fifth grade readers leach scarborough rescorla 2003

Reading Proficiencies of Fourth and Fifth Grade Readers (Leach, Scarborough & Rescorla, 2003)

Source: Leach, J. M., Scarborough, H. S., & Rescorla, L.(2003). Late-emerging reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 211-224.


Profiles of struggling readers riddle buly valencia 2002 valencia 2011

Profiles of Struggling Readers(Riddle Buly & Valencia, 2002; Valencia, 2011)

Sources:

Riddle Buly, M., & Valencia, S. W. (2002). Below the bar: Profiles of students who fail state reading assessments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(3), 219-239.

Valencia, S. W. (2011). Reader profiles and reading disabilities. In A. McGill-Franzen & R. L. Allington (Eds.), Handbook of reading disability research (pp. 25-35). New York: Routledge.


What i have learned1

What I Have Learned . . .

  • Comprehension is not a unitary construct

  • Particularity is essential

  • Interventions must be matched to specific children

  • We need new assessments of comprehension

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


References

References

  • Almasi, J. F., & Fullerton, S. K. (2012). Teaching strategic processes in reading (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.

  • Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Buckman, M. (in press). The impact of supplemental instruction on low-achieving adolescents’ reading engagement. Journal of Educational Research.

  • Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (2013). Reading intervention in middle and high schools: Implementation fidelity, teacher efficacy, and student achievement. Reading Psychology, 34(1), 26-58.

  • Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Madden, A. (2010). The impact of a strategy-based intervention on the comprehension and strategy use of struggling adolescent readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 257-280.

  • Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (in preparation). The impact of supplemental reading instruction on struggling adolescents’ reading achievement, motivation, and strategy use. Unpublished manuscript.

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


References1

References

  • Dole, J. A., Nokes, J. D., & Drits, D. (2009). Cognitive strategy instruction. In S. E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 347-372). New York: Routledge.

  • Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., Meloth, M. S., Vavrus, L. G., Book, C., Putnam, J., & Wesselman, R. (1986). The relationship between explicit verbal explanations during reading instruction and student awareness and achievement: A study of reading teacher effects. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(3), 237-252.

  • Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., Sivan, E., Rackliffe, G., Book, C., Meloth, M. S., Vavrus, L. G., Wesselman, R., Putnam, J., & Bassiri, D. (1987). Effects of explaining the reasoning associated with using reading strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 22(3), 347-368.

  • Durkin, D. (1978/1979). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 481-533.

  • Edmonds, M. S., Vaughn, S. Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Tackett, K. K., Schnakenberg, J. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262-300.

  • Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research, 71(2), 279-320.

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


References2

References

  • National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (Report of the subgroups). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

  • Paris, S. G., Wasik, B. A., & Turner, J. C. (1991). The development of strategic readers. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, and P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. II, pp. 609-640). New York: Longman.

  • Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. 3, pp. 545-561. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21, 139-161.

  • Pressley, M., Symons, S., Snyder, B. L., & Cariglia-Bull, T. (1989). Strategy instruction comes of age. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 16-30.

  • Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Schatschneider, C., & Torgesen, J. (2010). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten through 3rd grade: A practice guide (NCEE 2010-4038). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from whatworks.ed.gov/publications/practiceguides.

  • Wilkinson, I. A. G., & Son, E. H. (2011). A dialogic turn in research on learning and teaching to comprehend. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 4, pp. 359-387). New York: Routledge.

Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky


  • Login