# data[].attributes.body
5 ways to support students who struggle with reading comprehension. (2020, February 3). Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/5-ways-support-students-who-struggle-reading-comprehension

Building background knowledge. (2019, March 1). Reading Rockets. https://www.readingrockets.org/article/building-background-knowledge

Direct instruction of reading for elementary-aged students. (2017, June 19). LD@school. https://www.ldatschool.ca/direct-instruction/

Page 11: Using graphic organizers. (n.d.). IRIS. https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/sec-rdng/cresource/q3/p11/

Promoting reading comprehension in secondary students with learning disabilities. (2015, June 22). Council for Learning Disabilities | The Council for Learning Disabilities (CLD) is an international organization that promotes evidence-based teaching, collaboration, research, leadership, and advocacy. https://council-for-learning-disabilities.org/promoting-reading-comprehension-in-secondary-students-with-learning-disabilities/

(2018, August 16). Reading Rockets. https://www.readingrockets.org/article/reading-aloud-build-comprehension

Sarisahin, S. (2020). Reading comprehension strategies for students with learning disabilities who are emergent bilingual. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220910731

Strategies that promote comprehension. (n.d.). LD OnLine: The world's leading website on learning disabilities and ADHD. https://www.ldonline.org/article/29202/

Summarizing. (n.d.). AdLit. https://www.adlit.org/in-the-classroom/strategies/summarizing

Vocabulary knowledge | Reading comprehension | Council for learning disabilities. (2015, June 22). Council for Learning Disabilities | The Council for Learning Disabilities (CLD) is an international organization that promotes evidence-based teaching, collaboration, research, leadership, and advocacy. https://council-for-learning-disabilities.org/effective-vocabulary-instruction-for-kindergarten-to-12th-grade-students-experiencing-learning-disabilities/

# data[].attributes.headline
MAAP (Making Connections, Asking Questions, Predicting, Peer Teaching)

# data[].attributes.subject
MAAP (Making Connections, Asking Questions, Predicting, Peer Teaching)

# data[].attributes.body
MAAP is important when working with students who are English Language Learners (ELL) and struggling with reading comprehension. First foundational skills must be mastered through the use of MAAP. Heavy interaction is key when using this strategy, along with allowing ELL students to use both their native language and the English language to develop their thoughts and knowledge based on text.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Teachers of students with learning disabilities (LD) who also are emergent bilingual (EB) are tasked with meeting students' individual learning needs and developing academic language. Teachers require specialized knowledge in second-language acquisition and the specific learning strategies to support students' learning disabilities. Reading comprehension skills are the foundational skills that students with LD who are EB most often need to improve. When working with students, research-based reading strategies to support their reading comprehension skills are critical, but must also support students' developing English proficiency. This article identifies research-based reading comprehension strategies supportive of developing English proficiency that may be implemented for students with LD who are EB in the elementary grade levels. A self-evaluation tool is provided to guide teachers in helping their students to improve their reading comprehension skills while supporting their language development.

The number of students who are emergent bilingual (EB) has increased dramatically in U.S. public schools. Emergent bilingual is a term used for students who function both in their home language and in the new language of their school ( García & Kleifgen, 2010). The population of public-school students who are EB rose from 3.8 million to 4.8 million in 2015 ( National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, 2017), and it is predicted that approximately 40% of students will come from non-English-speaking homes by 2030 ( Solari et al., 2014). Furthermore, 713,000 students who are EB were identified as students with disabilities in 2015, constituting 14.7% of the EB population in U.S. public schools ( National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, 2017). Thirty-four percent of special education students have a learning disability (LD), representing the highest category among all disabilities ( National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, 2017). According to the International Dyslexia Association (2017), approximately 85% of the students with LD have a learning disability in reading. For students with learning disabilities in reading, many students need support in the area of reading comprehension ( Boulineau et al., 2004).

Students with LD who are EB need supports related to both their emerging language skills as well as their disability. Unlike primary English speakers, additional language support is needed to assist EB students in meeting the academic content and achievement standards every student is expected to meet in addition to reaching annual targets toward developing English proficiency. Therefore, a student with an LD and at the same time is learning English may have additional challenges in reading comprehension associated with developing language proficiency. This is evident in the data, as only 9% of students who are learning English and 12% of students with disabilities are at or above proficient in reading among fourth-grade students ( National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, 2017). In 2017, the average reading score of the fourth-grade students who were learning English was 37 points lower than the average score for their primary English-speaking peers ( National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, 2017). Solari et al. (2014) found students with LD who also were EB performed lower in reading than general education students and students who are EB only.

Students with LD who are EB need both effective academic as well as linguistic strategies to strengthen their reading comprehension. Because teachers have restricted time to teach reading, using the allotted time effectively is essential ( Vaughn et al., 2000). Thus, it is critical for educators to implement research-based reading comprehension strategies that also enhance students' developing English proficiency. Instruction for students with LD who are EB needs to be comprehensive, thorough, and clear with an intentional and dual focus on language and comprehension development ( Vaughn et al., 2003). This article presents a tool for planning, guiding, and self-evaluation with research-based reading comprehension strategies supportive of developing English proficiency for general and special education teachers of elementary students with LD who are EB. The MAPP tool acronym stands for Making connection, Asking questions, Predicting, and Peer teaching; and can be used in conjunction with read-aloud or shared textbook reading strategies in either small or whole-group instruction.

Interactive Reading Comprehension Strategies

The MAPP planning guide, guiding questions, and teacher self-evaluation tool was created by the author based on comprehensive review of the literature on effective reading comprehension strategies for students with LD who are EB. Due to limited research studies involving students with LD who are EB, the date range is extended to 20-year span. This search included the following search terms: English language learners, dominant language, native language, home language, English as a second language, dual language learners, bilingual, multilingual, reading comprehension, reading strategies, reading interventions, reading skills, reading graphic organizers, reading story-maps, preteaching vocabulary, learning disability, learning disorder, learning delay, learning handicap, and learning impairment. The search terms were used to systematically search four online databases (i.e., Academic Search Premier, Education Full Text, ERIC, and PsycINFO) for empirical peer-reviewed research. Non-empirical articles, literature reviews, dissertations, and concept articles were removed. Studies that did not include students who were EB with LD were excluded from the search results.

The strategies selected for the MAPP tools are grounded in demonstrated effective reading comprehension approaches for students with LD who are EB ( Chiang & Liu, 2011; Haagar & Windmueller, 2001; Jozwik & Douglas, 2017; Orosco & O'Connor, 2014; Sáenz et al., 2005; Santoro et al., 2006). However, what is important across all studies was the interactive nature of how teachers taught and students utilized these strategies. This interaction is critical in providing supportive opportunities for students who are EBs to intentionally practice academic language. According to Vygotsky's sociocultural theory, learning occurs via interaction and interactive learning environment supports students' second-language development ( Wright, 2010). When teachers (a) explicitly teach their students reading comprehension strategies, (b) model how to use the strategies, and (c) create opportunities that students may interact with each other, the reading comprehension skills of students with LD who are EL may be affected positively. Whether students are diagnosed with disabilities or not, they are in the classrooms. Thus, using reading comprehension strategies interactively is crucial for every single student in the classrooms.

Interaction is critical for students with LD who are EB. Interaction needs to be within the students' capability of English proficiency and zone of approximal development. In addition, students need to have in-class opportunities to use their primary language. Using their primary language may help students to have increased involvement in class and interaction with their peers, which may help students to connect to new reading knowledge ( Lopez-Reyna, 1996; Orosco & O'Connor, 2014). However, the focus of this article is to give teachers a general idea about how to increase student interaction while instructing them in English. Teachers need to consider that there are students who are at varying levels of English language proficiency (e.g., entering, emerging, developing, expanding, bridging) ( Bailey & Huang, 2011). Differentiation based on the students' levels is beyond the scope of this article but more information can be found at https://wida.wisc.edu. The goal of the MAPP tool is to guide teachers to increase interaction to support students in developing proficiency while working toward addressing reading comprehension difficulties.

Interactive strategies consist of back and forth exchanges and activities that enhance the text comprehension of students through focused and meaningful discussions ( Orosco & O'Connor, 2014). For students who are EB, the interaction during the use of comprehension strategies is of critical importance, assisting them in the participation of extended academic conversations supporting continued development of their language proficiency while deepening their academic understanding. By building on their background knowledge, students use strategies that help them connect with the information presented in the text ( Lopez-Reyna, 1996). Interactive strategies also help students, teachers, and peers to discuss the concepts and display their knowledge. When students with LD who are EB use comprehension strategies, they not only interact and collaborate with each other, but also develop their oral language, which positively affects their reading comprehension ( Orosco & O'Connor, 2014).

Students who are EB bring a wide range of life and cultural experiences to the classroom that serve as important links to text comprehension. These connections, however, may not be inherently apparent for students, particular for students who struggle with reading comprehension. It is important to note that often times the second language levels of students who are EB may appear to constrict the effectiveness of accessing background knowledge and application of higher order cognitive and metacognitive strategies without the awareness of the teachers ( McNeil, 2011). Reading comprehension strategies may be ineffective unless their use is interactive. Four components of interactive reading comprehension strategies that teachers can incorporate in their teaching to support students with LD who are EB include the following.

1. Making connections with new information and activating prior knowledge ( Bos & Anders, 1992; Echevarria & McDonough, 1995; Gallego et al., 1990; Jozwik & Douglas, 2017; Klingner & Vaughn, 1996; Lopez-Reyna, 1996; Orosco & O'Connor, 2014).

2. Asking questions ( Gallego et al., 1990; Jozwik & Douglas, 2017; Lopez-Reyna, 1996; Sáenz et al., 2005; Tam et al., 2006).

3. Predicting ( Bos & Anders, 1992; Echevarria & McDonough, 1995; Gallego et al., 1990; Jozwik & Douglas, 2017; Klingner & Vaughn, 1996; Lopez-Reyna, 1996).

4. Peer teaching and sharing knowledge ( Bos & Anders, 1992; Gallego et al., 1990; Jozwik & Douglas, 2017; Lopez-Reyna, 1996; Sáenz et al., 2005).

The acronym MAPP will be used to refer to these reading comprehension strategies that will be identified in terms of each component, benefits, and examples.

Successful readers supplement information from their background knowledge and experiences to create coherence in a text ( Taylor et al., 2000). Struggling readers often fail to add relevant background knowledge to support comprehension or may add irrelevant knowledge ( McMaster et al., 2014). Making connections with new information and activating prior knowledge is a strategy that creates opportunities for students with LD who are EB to build connections between what they already learned and experienced and what they learn during the lesson. Making connections between the new information and students' experiences will make the lesson more meaningful for the students and will support the development of their reading comprehension ( Echevarria & McDonough, 1995; McLaughlin, 2012). When students interactively use this strategy by sharing their prior knowledge and experiences with each other, they activate their prior knowledge, which can promote text comprehension and content learning for students with LD who are EB ( Orosco & O'Connor, 2014). By asking students to make connections to their own lives, experiences, cultures, and communities with the readings and the teacher integrated activities, students can make capital out of their cultural and personal experiences, which may help them improve their reading comprehension ( Orosco & O'Connor, 2014). By encouraging the use of this strategy through interactive discussion and collaboration, students are able to construct meaning from their readings and improve their reading comprehension.

Students with disabilities are often not active in their reading comprehension ( Jitendra et al., 1998). Strategies that prompt students to monitor and reflect on their reading yield stronger effects ( Klingner et al., 2010). Asking and answering questions encourages students to be active before, during, and after reading. Students with LD who are EB need to have an opportunity to explain their responses and confirm their understanding by asking each other questions interactively. Asking questions reinforces students' text comprehension and also provides teachers with an opportunity to assess their students' learning and understanding ( Lopez-Reyna, 1996). For students who are EB asking questions may assist their reading comprehension and being proficient readers.

Students with disabilities may struggle with reflection upon how the narrative is progressing ( Klingner et al., 2010). Predicting is a strategy that assists students with LD who are EB in interacting with each other related to the text, and engages them in their readings by creating a background for the text. Involving students in an interactive predicting strategy motivates students to read the text and comprehend it to check their predictions and confirm their understanding ( Lopez-Reyna, 1996).

Students with disabilities often have a hard time implementing and generalizing strategies for comprehension ( Kim et al., 2006). Reciprocal teaching capitalizes on learning through social interactions until strategies are internalized ( Klingner & Vaughn, 1996). These interactions lead to more mature cognitive responses ( Gallego et al., 1990) and assist students to understand cognitively demanding tasks ( Sáenz et al., 2005). Peer teaching and sharing knowledge is another comprehension strategy that is helpful to support the learning of students with LD who are EB ( Jozwik & Douglas, 2017; Lopez-Reyna, 1996; Sáenz et al., 2005). Students interactively guide each other to think more about what they read by making connections to their backgrounds. When students read aloud, they may correct each other's errors as well. Partner "read-aloud" helps students with LD who are EB construct meaning from the text interactively. It also strengthens student reading comprehension ( Sáenz et al., 2005). As the text is read, students can share their comments related to the text, which would also indicate their text comprehension (Bos & Anders, 1992; Gallego et al., 1990; Jozwik & Douglas, 2017; Lopez-Reyna, 1996). Peer teaching and sharing knowledge may help students to develop not only their reading skills but also speaking and listening skills as well.

Implementing the Planning Guide

Teachers are encouraged to use the MAPP planning guide (see Table 1) when they prepare their lessons. Using this guide may help teachers select a text that is relevant for their students by considering the experiences, interests, and background of their students. Scanning the book and identifying opportunities for students to make self-connections, ask questions, predict, and peer teach would assist teachers to choose the right book. Fly Away Home ( Bunning, 1991) was selected as an example text that will be used to plan MAPP; however, teachers should select texts based on their grade level and the topic being studied. This book is about a boy and his father who live at the airport and try not to be noticed by the security. Planning each strategy and interaction will be exemplified around this selected text. Prompts or sentence frames used in the guide may be provided to students either orally, written, or both.

Evaluating the Teacher Self-Evaluation

After using the MAPP planning guide to prepare the interactive lessons with effective reading comprehension strategies, teachers may use the MAPP teacher self-evaluation tool (see Tables 3- 6) to reflect on how well they did and what they are going to do next time. The MAPP teacher self-evaluation tool is based on a comprehensive review on the literature of effective reading comprehension strategies for students with LD who are EB. Teachers may use these self-evaluations during or at the end of their lessons to ensure they interactively use MAPP reading comprehension strategies in their lessons to support the reading comprehension and language development of their students with LD who are EB. Teacher self-evaluations consist of MAPP strategies, self-evaluation of strategy implementation, self-evaluation of interaction, and examples related to the strategies. By using the MAPP self-evaluation tool, teachers can assess if they (a) interactively connect their teaching with students' previous learning and activate prior knowledge, (b) implement the asking questions strategy, (c) guide their students to make predictions about the text before and during reading, (d) guide their students to work with their peers, and (e) share their knowledge.

Implementing research-based interactive reading comprehension strategies is a high impact practice for students with LD who are EB to develop their reading comprehension skills. Teachers are encouraged to use the MAPP self-evaluation tool ( Tables 3- 6), which consists of not only the effective reading comprehension strategies but also approaches to increase intentionality of interaction. Teachers may regularly use MAPP during their lesson planning, during and after their teaching in whole and small group interventions to engage in self-reflection on their teaching practices. During implementation, if students require additional support with using these strategies interactively, teachers may scaffold questions, use hints, and use examples of guidance questions to initiate interaction and keep it going. When students use MAPP interactively with their peers, they develop their interaction and collaboration skills, which have the potential to increase oral language development that positively affects reading comprehension skills ( Orosco & O'Connor, 2014).

Conclusion

Previous research has referred to student academic struggles due to learning disabilities or language acquisition ( Hoover et al., 2016). Moreover, placement of students who are emergent bilingual in special education is a complex issue because of several factors such as cultural, linguistic, ethnic, and socioeconomic, which may result in high rate of disproportionality and overrepresentation in special education programs, especially in learning disabilities ( Klingner et al., 2006; Vaughn et al., 2007). However, in addition to those discussions, implementation of research-based reading comprehension strategies may be very supportive whether a student has a learning disability and/or emergent language skills. Educators may have difficulty with simultaneous content and language development of their students, so it is important to be aware of the importance of interaction. Also, when teachers relate their instruction to their students' cultural and linguistic backgrounds, students' reading development has the potential to be positively impacted ( Orosco & O'Connor, 2014).

Educators of students with LD who also are EB may interactively use MAPP planning, guiding questions, and self-evaluation with research-based reading comprehension strategies presented in this article. It is recommended that teachers print MAPP tables, laminate, and keep them in their classroom to use before, during, and after lessons. When teachers use MAPP in their classes interactively, it may not only help their students with LD who are EB to be engaged and interactive during the instruction, but also improve their reading comprehension skills. Teachers could model these MAPP strategies, teach their students how to use them, provide guidance and feedback regarding these strategies, and promote independent practice integrating MAPP to increase the students' reading comprehension and language development.

References

Bos, C. S., Anders, P. L. (1992). Using interactive teaching and learning strategies to promote text comprehension and content learning for students with learning disabilities. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 39, 225-238. |
Google Scholar Crossref

Hoover, J. J., Baca, L. M., Klingner, J. K. (2016). Data-driven decision making: Distinguishing language acquisition and cultural behaviors from a disability. In Hoover, J. J. (Ed.), Why do English learners struggle with reading? Distinguishing language acquisition from learning disabilities (pp. 141-162). Corwin. |
Google Scholar Crossref

International Dyslexia Association . (2017). Dyslexia basics. https://dyslexiaida.org/dyslexia-basics-2/
Google Scholar

Vaughn, S., Bos, C. S., Schumm, J. S. (2007). Teaching culturally and linguistically diverse students. In Vaughn, S., Bos, C. S., Schumm, J. S. (Eds.), Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk in the general education classroom (pp. 265-291). Pearson Education.
Google Scholar

Wright, W. E. (2010). Foundations for teaching English language learners: Research, theory, policy, and practice. Caslon.
Google Scholar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reading Comprehension Strategies for Students With Learning Disabilities Who Are Emergent Bilingual - Suheyla Sarisahin, 2020

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Abstract Teachers of students with learning disabilities (LD) who also are emergent bilingual (EB) are tasked with meeting students' individual learning needs and developing academic language. Teachers require specialized knowledge in second-language acquisition and the specific learning strategies to support students' learning disabilities.

# data[].attributes.body
Here students take lead of their own learning and hold one of four specific roles. These are the Questioner, Summarizer, Clarifier, and Predictor. Each of these roles require students to be actively listening and reading along the text. The different roles also serve different purposes in comprehension and allow for a wide-range of practice for students.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
These strategies can help students who are able to decode well but have difficulty understanding what they read-and they're beneficial for all students.

monkeybusinessimages / iStock

When we think of reading issues, we often imagine children who struggle to decode the letters in text and turn them into spoken language. This type of struggling reader has a very difficult time figuring out what many of the words are and has poor phonological (speech-sound) skills. However, there are also many students who sound like they're reading beautifully but have difficulty with understanding vocabulary and figurative language, inferencing, verbal reasoning, grammatical development, and oral expression.

As children get older, if they are decoding text well we assume they are reading well. Once a person learns to decode, reading comprehension becomes more about language comprehension and focus. At this transition, starting around third grade, teachers may begin to notice some students who decode text fluently but are not understanding.

Since this type of struggling reader is less noticeable than ones who have difficulty decoding, they often slip under the radar until they begin to fail standardized state comprehension tests. Even then, their issues may go undetected for a long time, resulting in middle and high school students who sound like they're reading but understand nothing that they have read.

These struggling readers should be targeted for remediation-the earlier the better. However, remediation consisting of practice passages and questions may be ineffective as it focuses too narrowly on text-based skills.

Supporting Students Who Struggle With Comprehension

Here are five strategies to try out with students who read fluently but struggle to comprehend what they're reading.

1. Target overall comprehension of language: Recent research reveals that reading comprehension difficulties may stem from an underlying oral language weakness that exists from early childhood, before reading is even taught. It turns out that students who have poor reading comprehension also often understand fewer spoken words and less of what they hear, and have worse spoken grammar. So, to address reading comprehension deficits effectively, educators may have to use an approach that teaches vocabulary, thinking skills, and comprehension first in spoken language and then in reading and written language.

2. Teach vocabulary: Because students with poor comprehension often have poor vocabulary skills and understand less of what they hear, it's helpful to teach the meanings of new words through the use of multisensory strategies like graphic organizers, pictures, and mnemonics. Improving their overall language skills increases the likelihood that they will understand the words they encounter in written text. Since it is impossible to know every word one might encounter, students should be taught about the different types of context clues and how to use them to determine the meaning of unknown words.

Discussing or activating prior knowledge,

Developing questions while reading,

Connecting what they are reading to another text, something they have seen, or something they have experienced,

Visualizing or picturing what they are reading,

Making predictions about what will come next in the text,

Looking back for keywords and rereading in order to clarify or answer questions, and

Thinking aloud to model the strategies and thought processes needed for comprehension.

3. Teach thinking strategies: Once students have the vocabulary to be able to make it through a text, they often struggle with the complex thinking or sustained attention required to keep up with all of the important details and to access information that is implied but not directly stated. Teachers can instruct students on cognitive strategies they can use. Many common text reading strategies-such as annotation, SQ3R, and the KWL chart -make use of these thinking strategies, including:

Students can learn and then use the strategies that work best for them depending on the text they're reading. Pulling deeper meaning out of text through the use of thinking strategies can be beneficial not just to reading comprehension but also to writing.

Questioner, who poses questions about parts of the lesson, discussion, or text that are unclear or confusing, or to help make connections with previously learned material.

Summarizer, who sums up each important point or detail from the lesson, discussion, or text.

Clarifier, who tries to address the Questioner's issues and make sure that parts they found confusing are clear to others.

Predictor, who makes a prediction about what will happen next based on what was presented, discussed, or read,

4. Have students practice reciprocal teaching: Once taught, cognitive strategies can be consistently practiced and implemented through the use of reciprocal teaching, which encourages students to take a leadership role in their learning and begin to think about their thought process while listening or reading. Teachers can use reciprocal teaching during class discussions, with text that is read aloud, and later with text that is read in groups. The students should rotate between the following roles:

5. Directly teach comprehension skills: Students should be directly taught comprehension skills such as sequencing, story structure using the plot mountain, how to make an inference and draw a conclusion, and the different types of figurative language. Students should have the opportunity to first use the skills with text that they hear the teacher read aloud, and then later with text that they read independently at their own level.

The comprehension skills and strategies listed above can be used with the whole class, as they closely align with reading and language arts standards for elementary and middle school students. Teachers can help students select reading material with vocabulary that matches their current ability levels so that within a classroom, students are reading text and working on vocabulary at levels that are accessible for each of them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Ways to Support Students Who Struggle With Reading Comprehension

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
These strategies can help students who are able to decode well but have difficulty understanding what they read-and they're beneficial for all students.

# data[].attributes.body
This allows students to have a visual of what they have read, along with various parts of the text depicted in a clear manner. Story frames activate prior knowledge of the main parts of a story: title, characters, main ideas.  Students then organize all information and can refer back to their notes when looking for answers or studying.  These frames can be done independently or used to encourage interaction between students in the classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By: Texas Education Agency

General instructional activities

To correspond with a typical reading lesson, comprehension strategy instruction can be organized into a three-part framework, with specific activities used before, during, and after reading.

Providing instruction such as the following example allows students to see, learn, and use a variety of comprehension strategies as they read. Note, however, that the framework is a general one and represents an array of strategies. All of the strategies in this framework do not have to be used with every text or in every reading situation.

Before Reading

Before reading, the teacher may:

Motivate students through activities that may increase their interest (book talks, dramatic readings, or displays of art related to the text), making the text relevant to students in some way.

Activate students' background knowledge important to the content of the text by discussing what students will read and what they already know about its topic and about the text organization.

Students, with some help from the teacher, may:

Establish a purpose for reading.

Identify and discuss difficult words, phrases, and concepts in the text.

Preview the text (by surveying the title, illustrations, and unusual text structures) to make predictions about its content.

Think, talk, and write about the topic of the text.

During Reading

During reading, the teacher may:

Remind students to use comprehension strategies as they read and to monitor their understanding.

Ask questions that keep students on track and focus their attention on main ideas and important points in the text.

Focus attention on parts in a text that require students to make inferences.

Call on students to summarize key sections or events.

Encourage students to return to any predictions they have made before reading to see if they are confirmed by the text.

Students, with some help from the teacher, may:

Determine and summarize important ideas and supportive details.

Make connections between and among important ideas in the text.

Integrate new ideas with existing background knowledge.

Ask themselves questions about the text.

Sequence events and ideas in the text.

Offer interpretations of and responses to the text.

Check understanding by paraphrasing or restating important and/or difficult sentences and paragraphs.

Visualize characters, settings, or events in a text.

After Reading

After reading, the teacher may:

Guide discussion of the reading.

Ask students to recall and tell in their own words important parts of the text.

Offer students opportunities to respond to the reading in various ways, including through writing, dramatic play, music, readers' theatre, videos, debate, or pantomime.

Students, with some help from the teacher, may:

Evaluate and discuss the ideas encountered in the text.

Apply and extend these ideas to other texts and real life situations.

Summarize what was read by retelling the main ideas.

Discuss ideas for further reading.

Activities and procedures for use with narrative texts

The following are some examples of specific procedures that you can use to help students improve their comprehension of narrative texts.

Retelling

Retelling involves having students orally reconstruct a story that they have read.

Retelling requires students to activate their knowledge of how stories work and apply it to the new reading. As part of retelling, students engage in ordering and summarizing information and in making inferences. The teacher can use retelling as a way to assess how well students comprehend a story, then use this information to help students develop a deeper understanding of what they have read.

The teacher uses explicit instruction, explaining why retelling is useful, modeling the procedure, giving students opportunities to practice, and providing feedback. As the following chart shows, students' retellings should become more detailed as they become better readers.

Types of Retelling

Simple retelling
The student can:

identify and retell the beginning, middle, and end of a story in order.

describe the setting.

identify the problem and the resolution of a problem.

More complete retelling
The student can:

identify and retell events and facts in a sequence.

make inferences to fill in missing information.

identify and retell causes of actions or events and their effects.

Most complete retelling
The student can:

identify and retell a sequence of actions or events.

make inferences to account for events or actions.

ffer an evaluation of the story.

Story Maps

Story maps are visual representations of the elements that make up a narrative. The purpose of a story map is to help students focus on the important elements of narratives-theme, characters, settings, problems, plot events, and resolution-and on the relationship among those elements.

Story maps to be used with younger students can be very simple-like the one that follows. These maps focus on a single element, such as the sequence of a simple plot.

With older students, the maps can be more complicated, focusing on several elements. As with retellings, the teacher uses explicit instruction to introduce the procedure, explaining why story maps are useful, then modeling the procedure, giving students opportunities to practice, and providing feedback.

Story Frames¹

Similar to story maps, story frames are visual representations that focus students' attention on the structure of a story and on how the content of the story fits its structure.

Students use story frames as a way to activate their background knowledge of the elements of story structure and thus to organize and learn new information from a story. Simple story frames require students to provide basic information about the sequence of events in a story:

The problem in the story is ______.
This is a problem because ______.
The problem is solved when ______.
In the end ______.

More complex frames might involve having students supply more detailed information by summarizing sequences of actions or events, or providing factual information to explain problems or motivations.

The procedure encourages students to interact with each other, asking questions, seeking clarifications, and sharing evaluations. Again, as with story maps, the procedure can be simplified for use with younger students - it has been used successfully with grade-one students *- or made more sophisticated for use with older students.

And again, as with the other procedures that have been described, the procedure is introduced through explicit instruction, with the teacher first explaining why story frames are useful, then modeling when and where to use them, guiding students through practice opportunities, and providing corrective feedback along the way.

Directed Reading and Thinking Activity (DRTA)²

This procedure focuses on reading as a thinking process. Its intent is to teach children to make predictions throughout reading. Before reading, the teacher asks students to form a purpose for reading and to make predictions about the content of the story to be read.

During reading, the teacher stops students at strategic points in the story to ask students to make additional predictions and to verify, reject, or modify their purposes and predictions.

After reading, the teacher asks students to find and read aloud any part of the text that supports their predictions. Students must use the text to explain their reasoning and to prove the accuracy-or inaccuracy-of their predictions.

Often teachers have students use charts such as the following to record their predictions and information from the text that proves the prediction's accuracy:

Activities and procedures for use with expository text

The following are some procedures teachers use to help students improve their comprehension of expository texts.

The purpose of the K-W-L procedures is to help students become good readers by learning to do the things that good readers do. Specifically it helps students learn to activate their background knowledge and to set purposes for reading.

KWL stands for determining What I Know, What I Want to Learn, and reviewing What I Have Learned. The following chart shows the steps in each part of the procedure:

What I Know

What I Want To Learn

What I Learned

Students discuss what they already know about a topic in the text they will be reading. The teacher has students list ideas and concepts related to the topic, then has them organize their ideas into broad categories.

Students discuss what they want to learn from reading the text and write down specific questions that they think may be answered in the text.

After reading the text, students discuss what they learned from it. They next write what they learned and answer s t u d e n t - g e n e r a t e d questions about topics that were addressed in the text.

As they confirm the information in the Know column of the chart, students relate new information gained from their reading to knowledge they already have. As they generate questions for the Want column, they learn to set their own purposes for reading. Further, because they are reading to answer their own questions, students are more likely actively to monitor their comprehension. By putting information in their own words for the Learned column, students better understand what they know and what they do not know. Proceeding through these steps reinforces students' learning from text, involves them in doing what good readers do, and teaches them about their own reading processes.

Questioning the Author⁴

The Questioning the Author procedure involves discussion, strategy instruction, and self-explanation. It encourages students to reflect on what the author of a selection is trying to say so as to build a mental representation from that information. Teacher and students work collaboratively, reading to resolve confusion and to understand the meaning of the text.

Focusing on a segment of text, the students respond to teacher questions such as the following:

What is the author trying to say?

What does the author mean by this?

o Why is the author saying this?

What is the author getting at?

Through modeling, the teacher helps students to understand that some parts of a text can cause confusion and hinder comprehension. The teacher then discusses with students what they can do when comprehension problems occur. Students learn to "grapple" with text by emulating the teacher's questioning techniques.

Reciprocal Teaching⁵

Reciprocal Teaching is the name for a teaching procedure that is best described as a dialogue between the teacher and students. "Reciprocal" means simply that each person involved in the dialogue acts in response to the others. The dialogue focuses on a segment of a text the group is reading and is structured by the use of four comprehension strategies:

asking questions,

clarifying difficult words and ideas,

summarizing what has been read, and

predicting what might come next.

The teacher first models and explains how to apply a comprehension strategy, then gradually turns over the activity to the students. As the students become more competent, the teacher requires their participation at increasingly more challenging levels.

Reciprocal Teaching provides students with opportunities to observe the value of applying strategies in their "real" reading. In addition, it allows the teacher to identify problems individual students might have in using strategies and to provide instruction that is geared to individual needs.

Transactional Strategy Instruction⁶

Transactional Strategy Instruction (TSI) is a procedure that involves teaching students to construct meaning as they read by emulating good readers' use of comprehension strategies.

TSI helps students (1) set goals and plan for reading, (2) use background knowledge and text cues to construct meaning during reading, (3) monitor comprehension, (4) solve problems encountered during reading, and (5) evaluate progress. To accomplish these tasks, students are taught to use a set of reading strategies. The strategies typically include:

predicting based on prior-knowledge activation,

generating and asking questions,

clarifying,

visualizing,

relating background knowledge to text content, and

summarizing.

Instruction occurs in small-group settings, with the strategies used as vehicles to coordinate dialogue about text as students read aloud. In their groups, students are encouraged to relate a text to their background knowledge, to summarize text, to describe any mental images they make during reading, and to predict what might happen next in the text. As students read aloud, they engage in and exchange individual interpretations of and responses to the reading.

The I-Chart Procedure⁷

The I-Chart Procedure is a technique that promotes critical thinking by encouraging students to apply reading strategies to learn from content-area texts.

The procedure is organized into three phases: Planning, Interacting, Integrating and Evaluating. Students begin the Planning phase by using content-area texts to identify a topic of study. They then generate questions they want to answer as they read. Next, they construct a large chart, similar to the following, on which to record information as they gather it. They complete the Planning phase by collecting materials about the topic.

Teacher Questions and Student Questions

In the Interacting phase, students record their background knowledge of the topic, as well as other information they might gather. In addition, the teacher elicits and records relevant student questions. Finally, the students read and discuss, with teacher guidance, the sources of information.

In the final phase, Integrating and Evaluating, students make summaries for each question on the chart, incorporating information they have gathered. Next, they compare their summaries with background knowledge, clarify statements as necessary, and discuss new knowledge they have acquired. Finally, they locate new information to address any unanswered questions and report their findings to the group.

In this procedure, the teacher directs and models the phases of the procedure. Gradually, however, the teacher releases responsibility for managing the procedure to students. The goal is for the reader to satisfactorily apply these comprehension strategies independently.
References
References

Click the "References" link above to hide these references.

1. Cudd, E.T., & Roberts, L.L. (1987). Using story frames to develop reading comprehension in a first grade classroom The Reading Teacher, 41, 75-79.

2. Stauffer, R.G. (1975). Directing the reading-thinking process. New York: Harper & Row.

3. Ogle, D.M. (1986). K-W-L: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 39, 564-570. and Ogle, D.M. (1989). The know, want to know, learn strategy. In K.D. Muth (Ed.), Children's comprehension of text: Research into practice (pp. 205-233). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

4. Beck, I.L., McKeown, M.G., Hamilton, R.L., & Kucan, L. (1997). Questioning the author: An approach for enhancing student engagement with text. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

5. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117-175.

6. Brown, R., & Coy-Ogan, L. (1993). The Evolution of transactional strategies instruction in one teacher's classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 94, 221-233; Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P.B., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J., Almasi, L., & Brown, R. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. The Elementary School Journal, 92, 511-554.

7. Hoffman, J.V. (1992). Critical reading / thinking across the curriculum: Using I-Charts to support learning. Language Arts, 69, 121-127. Language Arts, 69, 121-127.

References

1. Cudd, E.T., & Roberts, L.L. (1987). Using story frames to develop reading comprehension in a first grade classroom The Reading Teacher, 41, 75-79.

2. Stauffer, R.G. (1975). Directing the reading-thinking process. New York: Harper & Row.

3. Ogle, D.M. (1986). K-W-L: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 39, 564-570. and Ogle, D.M. (1989). The know, want to know, learn strategy. In K.D. Muth (Ed.), Children's comprehension of text: Research into practice (pp. 205-233). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

4. Beck, I.L., McKeown, M.G., Hamilton, R.L., & Kucan, L. (1997). Questioning the author: An approach for enhancing student engagement with text. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

5. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117-175.

6. Brown, R., & Coy-Ogan, L. (1993). The Evolution of transactional strategies instruction in one teacher's classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 94, 221-233; Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P.B., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J., Almasi, L., & Brown, R. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. The Elementary School Journal, 92, 511-554.

7. Hoffman, J.V. (1992). Critical reading / thinking across the curriculum: Using I-Charts to support learning. Language Arts, 69, 121-127. Language Arts, 69, 121-127.

Comprehension Instruction, 16-24. Retrieved from http://www.netxv.net/pm_attach/67/TRI-Comprehension_Instr.pdf.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
LD OnLine is the leading website on learning disabilities, learning disorders and differences. Parents and teachers of learning disabled children will find authoritative guidance on attention deficit disorder, ADD, ADHD, dyslexia, dysgraphia, dyscalculia, dysnomia, reading difficulties, speech and related disorders.

# data[].attributes.body
Students are asked to create and answer questions throughout the reading of the text in order to draw inferences, make connections, and determine explicit information. This allows them to reach for previous knowledge as well as any new information read in the text to determine if their answers are appropriate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Promoting Reading Comprehension in Secondary Students with LD

Prepared by Marcia Kosanovich,Ph.D.
Network of Educators, LLC
(Revised August 2013)

Reading comprehension is "the process of simultaneously extracting and constructing meaning through interaction and involvement with written language" (Snow, 2002, p.11). Extracting meaning from text is to understand what the author has explicitly or implicitly stated. Constructing meaning is to interpret what the author has written based on the reader's background knowledge, experiences, capabilities, and abilities.

Why is reading comprehension important for secondary struggling readers?

Students in Grades 4-12 spend the majority of their days in content-area classes. As students advance in school, researchers suggest reading instruction should become more disciplinary (tied to content areas), reinforcing and supporting students' academic performance (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008). All content-area instruction (e.g., English language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies) utilizes literary or informational text in some manner, so students must comprehend specific texts and grasp the concepts being communicated in them. This is a particular concern as the texts students are asked to read become increasingly complex with unique linguistic and cognitive features that are not necessarily shared across disciplines.

What is the goal of reading comprehension instruction for secondary students with learning disabilities?

The goal of reading comprehension instruction is to help students understand written language. Students who comprehend well monitor their understanding as they read and use fix-up strategies, such as re-reading or summarizing, when understanding breaks down. Self-monitoring also helps students relate new information to their prior knowledge, fostering better understanding. However, many adolescents struggle to comprehend text due to a lack of background knowledge, an inability to relate content to prior knowledge, an inability to read text fluently, difficulty decoding words, an inability to attend to meaning while reading, an inability to use comprehension strategies, deficits in metacognition (often not aware they are not comprehending), or difficulty understanding the meanings of words (Boardman et al., 2008; Pressley, 2006; Reed & Vaughn, 2010).

We teach comprehension so that all students "can read a variety of materials with ease and interest, can read for varying purposes, and can read with comprehension even when the material is neither easy to understand nor intrinsically interesting" (Snow, 2002, p. xiii). This is particularly true for adolescent readers who increasingly need to gain meaning from conceptually dense texts, as well as to remember and use the information (Biancarosa & Snow, 2004; Perfetti, Landi, & Oakhill, 2005).

What are comprehension research-based guidelines and strategies to implement with secondary students with learning disabilities?

In Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices (Kamil et al., 2008), the panel describes elements important for those adolescents who need more support in reading comprehension. Students' learning needs should be identified through the use of an initial screening test or a threshold score on a required reading test and subsequent use of a diagnostic reading test administered, scored, and interpreted by a specialist. Then, the selection of a supplemental, intensive, and individualized reading intervention needs to be made. The intervention program or approach should provide an explicit instructional focus targeted to meet the learners' needs. The intervention should be provided by a reading specialist or teacher who has participated in thorough training in the use of the program or approach. Teachers or reading specialists should also have professional development to increase their understanding of adolescent struggling readers. Other elements for effective interventions noted by the panel include:

Word level interventions (e.g., systematic training in metacognitive decoding skills, such as subsyllabic segmentation)

Explicit instruction, with scaffolding and feedback, of approaches that help students become more active, strategic readers

Student collaboration in comprehension strategies (relies on teacher guidance)

Reciprocal Teaching

Graphic organizers to assist in understanding relationships among key concepts represented in texts

Specific instruction on text structures, organizational patterns, and linguistic conventions commonly found in expository text

Work in small groups or individually to increase intensity.

An increased amount of time and frequency working with students who are struggling.

Progress monitoring to determine if interventions are effective and to make instructional adjustments.

Most students demonstrate improved reading achievement when their teachers incorporate the following components of effective comprehension instruction before, during, and after reading (Edmonds et al., 2009; Snow, 2002):

purposeful and explicit teaching,

classroom interactions that support the understanding of content area texts,

instruction in the skills and strategies used by expert readers, and

content-area texts that are appropriately matched to students' abilities and the specific strategy being implemented.

These instructional practices usually can be implemented class-wide in any content area. In fact, comprehension strategies work best when taught and practiced in meaningful contexts, so using authentic material in core academic classes makes sense.

Before Reading

Teach students how to activate their background knowledge in connection with the topic to be read. Students better understand, think about, and retain new information when they are familiar with or taught background knowledge of a topic before reading. Activate prior knowledge by previewing text before reading:

1. Use specific strategies to activate prior knowledge, such as previewing headings or key concepts, or making a prediction and confirmation chart.

2. Prepare and guide previewing activities to support and focus the connections students make.

3. Use graphic organizers to introduce important information, solicit prior knowledge from students, and make predictions.

4. Avoid soliciting guesses from students without guidance or feedback.

5. Keep it short. Previewing should not take longer than 5 minutes, especially if a teacher has limited time with students.

6. Revisit after reading to assist in reviewing, confirming, or refuting predictions, summarizing, and making connections.

Explicitly teach key specialized vocabulary related to the topic.

Teach and have students practice how to set a purpose for reading.

Use an anticipation-reaction guide to help students link new and prior knowledge and activate students' interest and curiosity for the topic, promoting motivation and engagement.

During Reading

Explicitly teach students to ask and answer questions about text.

1. Teach students to ask and answer specific types of questions, such as questions whose answers are explicitly stated in the text and those that require students to make inferences based on what they have read (e.g., Question-Answer Relationship).

2. Use question generation on its own or as part of multi-strategy (e.g., Reciprocal Teaching) instruction.

3. Provide students with strategies to evaluate teacher-generated questions. For example, it is important to know if the answer will be found in the text or if it should be inferred.

Use graphic organizers which are visual representations that help students identify, organize, and remember important ideas from what they read. Adapt graphic organizers to text type (e.g., Venn diagram for compare/contrast informational text; story grammar map for literary text). Explicitly teach the use of graphic organizers to

1. represent and discuss connections,

2. confirm or refute predictions, and

3. record important information.

Explicitly teach comprehension monitoring strategies, or fix-up strategies when comprehension breaks down such as

1. Re-reading,

2. Asking someone questions about the text,

3. Considering relevant background knowledge, and

4. Examining the graphics more carefully

After Reading

Teach students how to use self-questioning strategies to reflect on what they have read.

Explicitly teach students to summarize the main ideas of what they read:

1. Teach students to summarize small amounts of text such as a short paragraph before summarizing longer sections.

2. Provide modeling, feedback, and many opportunities to practice summarization rules such as:

1. Selecting a topic sentence or inventing a topic sentence if one is not explicitly stated;

2. Using one word to replace a list of related items;

3. Deleting trivial and redundant information; and

4. Re-reading to make sure your summary makes sense.

3. Teach students how to use graphic organizers to write summaries.

4. Provide examples and non-examples of summaries to help students recognize and produce summaries that contain only key ideas.

Explicitly teach the use of graphic organizers to

1. write summaries,

2. review information, and

3. make connections

What are some guidelines for English-language learners (ELL)?

Francis et al., (2007) outline recommendations to guide the planning and implementation of any instructional approach or academic intervention to promote ELLs' reading ability:

ELLs need early, explicit, and intensive instruction in phonological awareness and phonics in order to build decoding skills.

K-12 classrooms across the nation must increase opportunities for ELLs to develop sophisticated vocabulary knowledge.

Reading instruction in K-12 classrooms must equip ELLs with strategies and knowledge to comprehend and analyze challenging narrative and expository texts.

Instruction and intervention to promote ELLs' reading fluency must focus on vocabulary and increased exposure to print.

In all K-12 classrooms across the U.S., ELLs need significant opportunities to engage in structured, academic talk.

Independent reading is only beneficial when it is structured and purposeful, and there is a good reader-text match.

What materials can be used to teach reading comprehension to struggling secondary students?

Any other text such as magazines, newspaper articles, Internet sources, library books, all of which can supplement content area learning. These sources need to be of high interest to and appropriate for secondary students.

Ways for students to monitor their reading such as graphic organizers, study guides, note-taking charts, reading logs, timelines, checklists, cloze activities, journals.

Sticky notes, index cards, or any type of paper for students to write summaries, predictions, questions, and unknown words as they read sections of text.

Informative posters, definitions, charts, maps, and graphs on the walls in the classroom to reinforce concepts and vocabulary.

References

Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next-A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.

Boardman, A. G., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Murray, C. S., & Kosanovich, M. (2008). Effective instruction for adolescent struggling readers: A practice brief. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction. http://www.centeroninstruction.org/files/Practice%20Brief%2DStruggling%20Readers%2Epdf

Edmonds, M. S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, A., 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, 262-300.doi: 10.3102/0034654308325998

Francis, D. J., Rivera, M., Lesaux, N., Kieffer, M., & Rivera, H. (2006). Practical guidelines for the education of English language learners: Research-based recommendations for instruction and academic interventions. Portsmouth, NH: Center on Instruction, RMC Research Cooperation.

Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., and Torgesen, J. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices: A Practice Guide (NCEE #2008-4027). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc.

Perfetti, C. A., Landi, N., & Oakhill, J. (2005). The acquisition of reading comprehension skill. In M. J. Snowling& C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 227-247). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.

Reed, D. K., & Vaughn, S. (2010). Reading interventions for older students. In T. A.Glover & S. Vaughn (Eds.), Response to intervention: Empowering all students to learn, a critical account of the science and practice (pp. 143-186). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Adolescent Literacy, 78(1), 40-59.

Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R & D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.

Recommend Readings

Alfassi, M. (2004). Reading to learn: Effects of combined strategy instruction on high school students. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(4), 171-184.doi: 10.3200/JOER.97.4.171-185

Almasi, J. F. (2003). Teaching strategic processes in reading. New York, NY:Guilford.

Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2001). Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read. Jessup, MD: National Institute forLiteracy.

Blanchowicz, C., & Ogle, D. (2001). Reading comprehension: Strategies for independent learners. New York, NY: Guilford.

Brown, A. L., & Palinscar, A. S. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension: Fostering and monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.

Bryant, D. P., Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Ugel, N., Hamff, A., & Hougen, M. (2000). Reading outcomes for students with and without reading disabilities in general education middle school content area classes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 23, 24-38.doi: 10.2307/1511347

Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6),815-843.doi: 10.1002/tea.20171

DiCecco, V.M.,& Gleason, M.M. (2002). Using graphic organizers to attain relational knowledge from expository text. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(4), 306-320.doi:10.1177/00222194020350040201

Flick, L. B., & Lederman, N. G. (2002).The value of teaching reading in the context of science and mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 102(3),105-106.

Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities. Review of Educational Research, 71, 279-320.doi: 10.3102/00346543071002279

Gersten, R., & Jimenez, R. (1998). Promoting learning for culturally and linguistically diverse students. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Jitendra, A. K., Hoppes, M. K., & Xin, Y. P. (2000). Enhancing main idea comprehension for students with learning problems: The role of a summarization strategy and self-monitoring instruction. The Journal of Special Education, 34(3), 127-139.doi: 10.1177/002246690003400302

Kosanovich, M. L., Reed, D. K., & Miller, D. H. (2010). Bringing literacy strategies into content instruction: Professional learning for secondary-level teachers. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction. Retrieved from http://www.centeroninstruction.org/files/Bringing%20Literacy%20Strategies%20into%20Content%20Instruction%2Epdf

Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., & Boardman, A. (2007). Teaching reading comprehension to students with learning difficulties. New York, NY: Guilford.doi: 10.1177/002246690003400302

Lovett, M.,& Steinbach, K. (1997). The effectiveness of remedial programs for reading disabled children of different ages: Does the benefit decrease for older children? Learning Disability Quarterly, 20(3), 189-210.doi: 10.2307/1511308

Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., Spencer, V., & Fontana, J. (2003). Promoting success in high school world history: Peer tutoring versus guided notes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(1), 52-65.doi: 10.1111/1540-5826.00057

McKeown, M.B., 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) pp. 218-253. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.44.3.1

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. (NIH Publication No. 00-4754).Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Raphael, T. E., & Au, K. H. (2005). QAR: Enhancing comprehension and test taking across grades and content areas. Reading Teacher, 59, 206-221.doi: 10.1598/RT.59.3.1

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.

Spencer, V. G., Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2003). Content area learning in middle school social studies classrooms and student with emotional orbehavioral disorders: A comparison of strategies. Behavioral Disorders, 28(2),77-93.

Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Peterson, D. S., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2005). The CIERA school change framework: An evidence-based approach to professional development and school reading improvement. Reading Research Quarterly,40(1), 40-69.doi: 10.1598/RRQ.40.1.3

Taboada, A., & Guthrie, J. (2006). Contributions of student questioning and prior knowledge to construction of knowledge from reading information text. Journal of Literacy Research, 38(1), 1-35.doi: 10.1207/s15548430jlr3801_1

Torgesen, J. K., Houston, D. D., Rissman, L. M., Decker, S. M., Roberts, G.,Vaughn, S., & Lesaux, N. (2007). Academic literacy instruction for adolescents: A guidance document from the Center on Instruction. Portsmouth, NH: RMCCorporation, Center on Instruction.

Trabasso, T., & Bouchard, E. (2002). Teaching readers how to comprehend text strategically. In C. C. Pressley & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 176-200). New York, NY: Guilford.

Van Garderen, D. (2004). Reciprocal teaching as a comprehension strategy for understanding mathematical word problems. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 20,225-229.doi: 10.1080/10573560490272702

Vaughn, S., Klinger, J. K., & Bryant, D. P. (2001). Collaborative strategic reading as ameans to enhance peer-mediated instruction for reading comprehension and content area learning. Remedial and Special Education, 22(2), 66-74.doi: 10.1177/074193250102200201

Vaughn, S., & Klinger, J. K. (1999).Teaching reading comprehension through collaborative strategic reading. Intervention in School and Clinic, 34, 284-292.doi: 10.1177/105345129903400505

Williams, J., Stafford, K., Lauer, K., Hall, K., & Pollini, S. (2009). Embedding reading comprehension training in content area instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 1-20.doi: 10.1037/a0013152

Wilder, A.A., & Williams, J.P. (2001). Students with severe learning disabilities can learn higher order comprehension skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 268-278.doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.93.2.268

Suggested Resources

Kosanovich M. L., Logan, T., Magill, K., & Weinstein, C. (2007). Fourth and Fifth Grade Student Center Activities. Florida Center for Reading Research. http://www.fcrr.org/curriculum/studentCenterActivities45.shtm

Kosanovich, M. L.,& MaGill, K. (2007). Teacher Resource Guide (with professional development DVD) to accompany the Fourth and Fifth Student Center Activities. Florida Center for Reading Research. http://www.fcrr.org/curriculum/studentCenterActivities45.shtm

Murray, C. S., Wexler, J., Vaughn, S., Roberts, G., Tackett. K. K., & Kosanovich, M. (2008). Effective instruction for adolescent struggling readers: Professional development module. Facilitator's guide. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction. http://www.centeroninstruction.org/files/EIASR%20FG%202nd%20Ed%2E.pdf

Note: The first edition of this InfoSheet was prepared by Diane Pedrotty Bryant, Judy Englehard, and Linda Reetz.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Promoting Reading Comprehension in Secondary Students with LD

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Promoting Reading Comprehension in Secondary Students with LD Prepared by Marcia Kosanovich,Ph.D. Network of Educators, LLC (Revised August 2013) Reading comprehension is "the process of simultaneously extracting and constructing meaning through interaction and involvement with written language" (Snow, 2002, p.11). Extracting meaning from text is to understand what the author has explicitly or implicitly stated.

# data[].attributes.body
Scaffolding of text and smaller steps are used to help students understand what they are learning through reading. Students are able to predict, analyze, and discuss what they have read through the use of smaller tasks. This can be done verbally or written, based on student preference and success. There has been significant data in correlation with student success in comprehension through the use of direct instruction, most specifically with students who have exceptional abilities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Add to favorites
by Michael Fairbrother and Dr. Jessica Whitley
What is Direct Instruction?

In general, direct instruction is an active, reflective approach to instruction that breaks learning into smaller steps with scaffolding, leading towards students' independence and mastery (Rosenshine, 2008; Rupley, 2009). Direct instruction, compared to other approaches to instruction, has been shown to be extremely beneficial for students with exceptionalities (Marchand-Martella, Kinder & Kubina, n.d.). Though direct instruction approaches are effective for all students, they are particularly effective in increasing the rate of learning for students with specific learning disabilities (Somerville & Leach, 1988).

Baker et al. (2013) describe the "compelling evidence indicat[ing] that explicit [direct] instruction has a positive impact on a range of student academic outcomes, particularly for students who are at risk for academic difficulties" (p. 334).

Barak Rosenshine, a long-time direct instruction researcher, breaks down the different kinds of direct instruction into the following approaches in his short 2008 synthesis:

the teacher effects pattern,

cognitive strategies meaning, and

Direct Instruction System for Teaching Arithmetic and Reading (DISTAR).

Though differences among the approaches exist, Rosenshine emphasized the following main underlying characteristics:

guided practice,

active student participation,

scaffolding and

gradual release of responsibility towards student independence.

This summary presents a short description of the three main evidence-based types of direct instruction synthesized by Rosenshine (2008), some of the reading programs most associated with them and examples of research showing how direct instruction has helped struggling readers improve their reading skills. The research discussed in this summary is focused on elementary reading instruction, with examples presenting ways direct instruction has shown to be effective and inclusive in classrooms by developing the foundational reading skills of all readers. To conclude, some of the main challenges to implementation will be presented as well as a section on where further information can be found.

The Teacher Effects Pattern

The teacher effects pattern is characterized by identifying highly effective teachers and then conducting research to determine which instructional strategies the teachers are using and how they are being utilized. In order to conduct this type of research, a pre-test would first be administered in a given subject to a number of classes of students. Teacher behaviours, including the number and type of questions asked, frequency of feedback, and time spent in guided practice, would then be observed and recorded, and a post-test would be administered.

This research is also referred to as 'process-product'. By comparing the instructional elements of the classrooms with the largest and smallest gains, a list of effective characteristics of direct instruction can be determined. More rigorous experimental studies can then be conducted with teachers trained in these assumedly effective instructional procedures in order to confirm the gains made by students.

Rosenshine (2008) and counterparts believe that the empirical results arising from this research represent a pattern of effective teaching practices and he summarizes the patterns effective teachers used when they taught well-structured topics such as math computation and alphabetics:

1. Begin a lesson with a short review of previous learning.

2. Begin a lesson with a short statement of goals.

3. Present new material in small steps, providing for students practice after each step.

4. Give clear and detailed instructions and explanations.

5. Provide a high level of active practice for all students.

6. Ask a large number of questions, check for student understanding, and obtain responses from all students.

7. Guide students during initial practice.

8. Provide explicit instruction and practice for seatwork exercises and monitor students during seatwork.

Successful published instructional reading programs embracing this direct instruction approach are Open Court Reading, Enhancing Core Reading Instruction (ECRI), and Cooperative Integrated Reading and Comprehension (CIRC), and a school wide approach shown to have overall positive effects in reading and mathematics titled Success for All.

Cognitive Strategies

This type of direct instruction began around 1968 and refers to instructional procedures used for teaching higher-level cognitive tasks, such as:

reading comprehension,

test-taking and

reflective thinking strategies.

This direct instruction approach has been used quite effectively for teaching strategies in reading comprehension such as (Rosenshine, 2008):

predicting,

clarifying,

question-generating and

summarizing.

Scaffolding, or temporary supports, is the predominant instructional procedure for teaching cognitive strategies, which provides support for initial learning. Below is a general list of instructional procedures of scaffolds.

1. Modelling of the use of strategy by the teacher.

2. Thinking aloud by the teacher as choices were made.

3. Providing cue cards of specific prompts to help students carry out the strategy.

4. Dividing the task into smaller components, teaching each component separately, and gradually combining the components into a whole process.

5. Anticipating student errors.

6. Encouraging student thinking aloud during strategy use.

7. Providing reciprocal teaching by teacher and students.

8. Providing checklists.

9. Providing models of completed work.

Whereas the teacher effects pattern style of direct instruction has less focus on scaffolding (e.g., props such as cue-cards), both cognitive strategies and teacher effects patterns do the following:

state the lesson goals,

break tasks into smaller components and

gradually work from modelling, with regular checks for understanding towards extensive student independent practice.

Open Court Reading, the ECRI Reading Program and Success for All incorporate cognitive strategies using scaffolds within their instructional procedures (Rosenshine, 2008).

Studies:

In a study by Coyne et al. (2009), direct instruction was focused on developing grade one students' listening comprehension strategies. Results showed that following the intervention, the students demonstrated significant gains in their ability to understand elements of stories read aloud to them.

In a second study, Fagella-Luby, Schumaker, and Deshler (2007) used direct and explicit cognitive instruction, Embedded Story Structure (ESS), to improve the reading comprehension skills of low-achieving high school students. Strategies included: student self-questioning of story grammar elements[2]; story-structure analysis; and summarizing.

Results showed that students with and without learning disabilities benefited from ESS techniques. Students improved their reading comprehension skills, retained more information, and felt ESS's direct and explicit cognitive strategies was beneficial approach for improving their reading skills.

DISTAR

DISTAR is an acronym for Direct Instruction System for Teaching Arithmetic and Reading and it developed as a whole school reform initiative that grew out of earlier reading instruction research by Engelmann and colleagues (Mac Iver & Kemper, 2002).

It is this direct instruction approach that most often corresponds to formal Direct Instruction (DI) in the literature, and its main components are:

An explicit step-by-step strategy.

Development of mastery at each step in the process.

Teachers are given specific correction procedures to use when students make errors.

Gradual fading of teacher direction as students move toward independent work.

Use of adequate and systematic practice through a range of examples of the task.

Cumulative review of newly learned concepts.

DISTAR's instructional approaches were created to complement specific curriculum packages and, unlike the teacher effects results, were not developed as part of general procedures for teachers (Rosenshine, 2008). This direct instruction approach receives the most criticism from educators due to its regular use of student choral responses, its reliance on teacher scripts and a general perception that it is overly directed and rigid (Rosenshine).

However the DISTAR reading program was selected by the American Federation of Teachers (1998) as one of the "What Works" programs, and a report prepared by the Education Consumers Foundation (2011) presented a number of meta-analyses purporting the strengths of DISTAR.

Research Findings: Effectiveness on the Components Critical to Successful Reading

Effectiveness of Direct Instruction in Alphabetics

Much of the research on direct instruction in reading is focused on five critical areas (Rupley, 2009):

For example, Nelson-Walker et al. (2013) investigated the relationship between the quality of reading instruction and reading achievement of at-risk and not-at-risk students in 42 first-grade classrooms. One group of teachers was trained in direct instruction protocols and the other continued with their regular practice. The direct/explicit instruction group received highly specific lesson plans, strict teaching routines for supporting the implementation of instruction and materials for intervention.

Results showed that classes whose teachers received the extra direct instruction coaching scored higher on tests of phonemic awareness, alphabetical principles and fluency skills and that there was more group practice (scaffolding). However, significant differences were not seen in reading connected text or comprehension strategies. The authors suggest that it was difficult to change teacher behaviour for instructionally complex topics such as vocabulary and comprehension, yet this could be attributed to teachers needing more instruction and practice time for developing the instructional skills for delivering effective cognitive strategy meaning instruction.

Kamps and Greenwood (2005) hypothesized that students would improve their reading skills through small-group instruction, focussing on phonics-based cognitive and scripted direct instruction strategies, teacher modelling, repeated practice, and reinforcement of new skills with the expectation of mastery learning. Additionally they believed that recent advances in positive behavioral support and early intervention models would favour learning opportunities for students at-risk of reading difficulties.

Demonstrating the effectiveness of explicit phonemic and phonics-based instruction, Kamps and Greenwood compared randomly selected first-grade students in four experimental groups ( n=176) to randomly selected students in four comparison groups ( n=164). Both groups were similar in their numbers of at-risk students (approximately 50%). Experimental groups received small-group explicit phonemic and phonics-based instruction, as well as positive behavioural support. Comparison groups were largely taught using conventional practices, which included whole group instruction, balanced literacy, and guided reading.

Experimental groups showed greater progression in nonsense word fluency and oral reading fluency at the end of first grade, revealing much greater improvements than the control groups. Kamps and Greenwood attributed the significant improvements among the experimental groups to the increased use of:

1. small group instruction,

2. systematic phonics instruction,

3. time spent on active reading engagement, and

4. teacher praise.

Critical Reading Skills for Explicit and Inclusive Reading Comprehension Instruction

Primary Reading Comprehension

In one recent study, Baker et al. (2013) researched the impact of structured read-aloud lessons for grade one students that were systematic and yet maintained an enjoyable teaching and learning atmosphere for teachers and students. Though acknowledging the value of read-aloud instruction, the authors pointed to a lack of structure in many teacher-led read-alouds, which limits the growth for acquiring essential early reading strategies.

The authors hypothesized that a more structured approach to reading instruction that was explicit and focused on comprehension and vocabulary knowledge should have a positive impact on these higher-order skills, and be particularly helpful for students with language and literacy difficulties. Listening comprehension skills were targeted with the belief that students, once taught to use these strategies to comprehend text read to them, would transfer these skills to their own reading situations as they developed their independent reading skills.

The read-aloud intervention incorporated core elements of explicit instruction. Lessons were organized around modelled teacher-led instruction moving toward independent student practice. Read-aloud lessons were sequenced to become more complex over time, building upon previous learned skills and strategies. Teachers and students engaged in frequent interactions about texts with commitment towards increasing interactions with at-risk students. Finally, extensive feedback was provided to students, with additional teacher modeling and corrective feedback for incorrect responses. Teachers in the comparison condition instructed using the read-aloud procedures they would typically use in their classrooms.

To study the impact of the read-aloud intervention on students, a randomized control trial was conducted with 12 first grade classes from 12 different schools. The study included 12 teacher participants and 225 student participants (control group, n =103; intervention group, n = 122). Students completed a test of language development to help researchers determine the number of students at-risk for language and literacy difficulties. The intervention group consisted of 43 students at-risk for literacy and language difficulties while the control group had 40 students at-risk in these categories. Students were tested on listening comprehension (measuring receptive language) and on narrative retell, expository retell, and vocabulary (the previous three measuring expressive language). Intervention was implemented over 19 weeks with students assuming greater independence as the lessons progressed. Lessons were 30 minutes long, focused on two-week units with six or seven lessons per unit: three lessons focused on expository text, and three or four lessons focused on narrative text with each lesson incorporating before, during and after text reading activities.

To measure understanding, all students were given a pre-test to be compared to a post-test. Regardless of risk-status group, students in the intervention condition performed better than those in the comparison condition on narrative retell and vocabulary outcomes for students. Students with language and literacy-risks showed significant improvements on the measures of narrative retell and vocabulary suggesting that they benefited from this systematic and explicit instruction.

However, the read-aloud intervention did not show a statistically significant effect on overall listening comprehension. What was most significant for Baker et al. (2013) was how explicit instruction showed favourable effects for young students in inclusive classrooms by developing skills from instruction that is explicit and systematic.

Considerations for Classroom Implementation

There are different interpretations of what direct instruction means. The types discussed in this summary are demonstrated evidence-based practices, repeatedly shown to be effective for improving the core reading skills of students with and without reading disabilities.

Direct instruction does require adhering to a structure and necessitates extensive practice and professional development before it can be used effectively to improve reading for students with and without reading disabilities and difficulties.

Direct instruction, as defined by DISTAR, is one of the many resources requiring schools or teachers to purchase a packaged curriculum for reading. There are many other resources and programs that are available for purchase; DISTAR is an example of one that has received attention in the research field.

There is a general impression that direct instruction is overly rigid and teacher controlled. Rosenshine (2008) attributes this perception to the DISTAR program rather than teacher effects pattern or cognitive strategy instruction. This reputation can make it hard for many to buy in to this approach.

Though Nelson-Walker et al. (2013) show the effectiveness of direct instruction in facilitating foundation reading skills in general elementary classrooms, much of the direct instruction research for students with reading difficulties is conducted outside of the classroom in more specialized settings. It is important that teachers examine the research results obtained for a specific program that they may be considering, and to choose one that best suits their context as well as the needs of their specific group of students.

Related Resources on the LD@school Website
Click here to access the article Explicit Instruction: A Teaching Strategy in Reading, Writing, and Mathematics for Students with Learning Disabilities. Click here to access the article Effective Vocabulary Strategies for Students with Learning Disabilities. Click here to access the article Commercial Reading Programs for Students with Learning Disabilities: Examining the Evidence Base.
Click here to access the article Visual Representation in Mathematics.

Additional Resources

This short synthesis from Barak Rosenshine is an excellent resource for looking at the differences between different interpretations of direct instruction. It provides a number of tables and lists recounting the major differences and similarities between teacher effect patterns, cognitive strategies meaning and DISTAR. Click here to review the synthesis.

This current practice alert is a four page discussion of the direct instruction approach incorporated by DISTAR. For those interested in more details on DISTAR's direct instruction this is a concise description of how it works, for whom it is intended, and how practical and effective it is. Click here to view the practice alert.

References

Baker, S., Santoro, L., Chard, D., Fien, H., Park, Y., & Otterstedt, J. (2013). An evaluation of an explicit read aloud intervention in whole-classroom formats in first grade. The Elementary School Journal, 113(3), 331-358.

Coyne, M., Zipoli, Jr., R., Chard, D.J., Fagella-Luby, M., Ruby, M., Santoro, L., & Baker, S. (2009). Direct instruction of comprehension: Instructional examples from intervention research on listening and reading comprehension. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 25, 221-245.

Education Consumers Foundation. (2011). Direct Instruction: What the Research Says. Retrieved from http://www.education-consumers.org/DI_Research.pdf.

Fagella-Luby, M., Schumaker, J., & Deshler, D. (2007). Embedded learning strategy instruction: Story-structure pedagogy in heterogeneous secondary literature classes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 131-147.

Kamps, D., and Greenwood, C. (2005) Formulating secondary-level reading interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(6). 500-509.

Mac Iver, M.A., & Kemper, E. (2002). Guest editors' introduction: Research on direct instruction in reading. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 7(2), 107-116.

Kinder,d., Kubina, R., & Marchand-Martella, N., Special Education and Direct Instruction: An Effective Combination. Retrieved March 28, 2016 from http://www.nifdi.org/docman/journal-of-direct-instruction-jodi/volume-5-winter-2005/469-special-education-and-direct-instruction-an-effective-combination/file

Nelson-Walker, N.J., Fien, H., Kosty, D.B., Smolkowski, K., Smith, J.L., Baker, S.K. (2013). Evaluating the effects of a systemic intervention on first-grade teachers' explicit reading instruction. Learning Disability Quarterly, 36(4), 215-230.

Rosenshine, B. (2008). Five meanings of direct instruction. Center on Innovation & Improvement. Retrieved from http://www.centerii.org/search/Resources%5CFiveDirectInstruct.pdf April 15 th, 2014.

Rupley, W.H., (2009). Introduction to direct/explicit instruction in reading for the struggling reader: Phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 25, 119-124.

[1] Also see Coyne et al., 2009 for a discussion on how teacher directed instruction is more appropriate for developing students' ability in understanding in comprehending text once it has been decoded.

[2] Story Grammar helps students understand the structure of a literary text. At an early elementary age a Story Grammar may include elements such as the characters, setting, and a beginning, middle, and end (retrieved from http://bcs.schoolwires.net/cms/lib5/AL01001646/Centricity/Domain/131/Story%20Grammar.pdf)
Michael Fairbrother is currently in his first year of a doctoral program at the Faculty of Education at the University of Ottawa. His concentration is in Teaching, Learning and Evaluation, and his research goals are primarily focused on bridging the gap between research and practice for elementary students at-risk for learning difficulties in reading. It is Fairbrother's hope to contribute to the creation of an effective framework involving parents, teachers and all other stakeholders directly connected to the learning experiences of young students before and upon their entry to school. Before beginning his Ph.D. at UofO, Fairbrother graduated from the University of British Columbia with a B.Ed. in general elementary instruction in 2006. Fairbrother completed his M.Ed. concentrating in Special Education in 2011. Fairbrother has seven years' experience teaching grades three through seven and two years' experience as a special education resource teacher in British Columbia public elementary schools.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Direct Instruction of Reading for Elementary-aged Students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
by Michael Fairbrother and Dr. Jessica Whitley What is Direct Instruction? In general, direct instruction is an active, reflective approach to instruction that breaks learning into smaller steps with scaffolding, leading towards students' independence and mastery (Rosenshine, 2008; Rupley, 2009). Direct

# data[].attributes.body
Explicit instruction and exposure to new words is necessary to increase skills across various subject areas and contexts. They are able to make connections when they are not spending time decoding words, and therefore better understanding of the text can be achieved. This directly correlates with comprehension of material. Teachers can use word walls, vocabulary lists, or introducing new words each day to students.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Council for Learning Disabilities | The Council for Learning Disabilities (CLD) is an international organization that promotes evidence-based teaching, collaboration, research, leadership, and advocacy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Vocabulary Knowledge | Reading Comprehension | Council for Learning Disabilities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Prepared by Beverly Weiser, PhD Southern Methodist University (Revised September 2013) Vocabulary knowledge is the single most important factor contributing to reading comprehension – Laflamme, 1997 The National Reading Panel of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD, 20…

# data[].attributes.body
The more students know about a topic, prior to learning about it in the classroom, the easier time they will have making connections and developing understanding on the subject. With background knowledge activated, students can go deeper into their learning and understand both implicit and explicit information. Inferences are also able to be made when students know about a topic prior to its introduction.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
To comprehend a story or text, young readers need a threshold of knowledge about the topic, and tougher state standards place increasing demands on children’s prior knowledge. This article offers practical classroom strategies to build background knowledge such as using contrasts and comparisons and encouraging topic-focused wide reading.

# data[].attributes.body
Students take information and make it concise, finding the main ideas throughout a text.  Key words and phrases are used to help with making connections and have better understanding/memory of information.  Breaking down the information to only include main parts helps reduce confusion and frustration while also increasing vocabulary and writing skills.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Background

Summarizing teaches students how to take a large selection of text and reduce it to the main points for more concise understanding. Upon reading a passage, summarizing helps students learn to determine essential ideas and consolidate important details that support them. It is a technique that enables students to focus on key words and phrases of an assigned text that are worth noting and remembering.

Benefits

Summarizing builds comprehension by helping to reduce confusion. Teachers train students to process the information they read with the goal of breaking down content into succinct pieces. This strategy can be used with the whole class, small groups, or as an individual assignment. Summarizing text by using writing activities builds on prior knowledge, helps improve writing, and strengthens vocabulary skills.

Create and use the strategy

Pre-select and introduce the text to be used in the Summarizing technique. Decide whether to have students use this strategy within one section, on one page, or with the entire book. Then, model the process of sifting out extra verbiage and extraneous examples within the passage. Give your students ample time and opportunities to practice.

1. Begin by reading OR have students listen to the text selection.

2. Ask students to write a summary of the target text based on the following framework questions:

1. What are the main ideas?

2. What are the crucial details necessary for supporting the ideas?

3. What information is irrelevant or unnecessary?

3. Guide students throughout the summary writing process. Have them use key words or phrases to identify the main points from the text.

4. Encourage students to write successively shorter summaries, constantly refining their written piece until only the most essential and relevant information remains.

What it looks like:

* To view this file, you'll need a copy of Acrobat Reader. Most computers already have it installed. If yours does not, you can download it now.

References

Jones, R. (2007). Strategies for Reading Comprehension: Summarizing. Retrieved 2008, January 29, from http://www.readingquest.org/strat/summarize.html.

Guthrie, J. T. (2003). Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction: Practices of Teaching Reading for Understanding. In C. Snow & A. Sweet (Eds.), Reading for Understanding: Implications of RAND Report for Education (pp. 115-140). New York: Guilford.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Summarizing teaches students how to take a large selection of text and reduce it to the main points for more concise understanding. Upon reading a passage, summarizing helps students learn to determine essential ideas and consolidate important details that support them.

# data[].attributes.body
It is important to read out loud with students to increase comprehension and reading skills. They are given a model in which to use when they begin to read on their own which helps fluency, expression, and decoding of words. Listening and attentive skills will also increase. It is important also to begin to introduce more difficult topics to students, as we read to them they can gain more understanding into more complex ideas without being frustrate by having to read it independently.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article discusses the power of reading aloud and goes a step further to discuss the power of thinking out loud while reading to children as a way to highlight the strategies used by thoughtful readers.

# data[].attributes.body
These are used to help students organize massive amounts of information. They help to categorize and create relationships that aid in comprehension of the material. Various types of graphic organizers can be used based on the student and subject area.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Page 11: Using Graphic Organizers

Graphic organizers are visual aids designed to help students organize substantial amounts of content information. In addition to being effective for vocabulary instruction, graphic organizers can also enhance reading comprehension by helping students to categorize information and to show the relationships among important concepts. There are many types of graphic organizers. What works for one topic or task may not be appropriate for another.

Listen as Cynthia Shanahan discusses how teachers should select the type of graphic organizers they wish to use based on the content area and desired student outcomes (time: 2:16).

Cynthia Shanahan, PhD
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
Executive Director UIC Council on Teacher Education
University of Illinois at Chicago

Transcript: Cynthia Shanahan, PhD

Graphic organizers come in all kinds of shapes and sizes and for all different purposes. They can help in as many ways as there are graphic organizers. There are so many graphic organizers for teachers to choose, so they really need to take several things into account. First, their main questions should be what do they want their students to get out of whatever it is that they're reading. Think about those outcomes and those goals and choose a graphic organizer that's going to help students meet those goals. Then you have to pay attention to the text. Some graphic organizers work better for different kinds of information, and it depends on the information in the text. For instance, if it's a science article or a science text, you're going to be choosing among a number of graphic organizers that might be different than if you are having your students reading a history text or a mathematic text. You have to take into account the kind of information, even within those discipline areas. There are differences in the way that text organize the information, and you need to pay attention to that. For instance, in a social studies textbook you might have comparison-contrast going on if it tells you about one country then tells you about another country, and you want students to compare and contrast, that would lead you to a comparison and contrast organizer. If you want them to read several documents and to come up with an answer to a central question, that's a different kind of graphic organizer than if you want them just to read one document and learn the information in the document. Finally, you have to look at the discipline area that's the focus of the reading. And think about what kinds of questions are typical of that discipline. There are graphic organizers that are specific to English but you would never use in chemistry or history or mathematics. So you really have to think about what it is that you want your students to know, and that's based upon the content area that you're in.

Teachers can find or create a variety of graphic organizer templates to improve reading comprehension in the content areas. It is important to keep in mind that the template's design should be aligned to the teacher's purpose for using it. For example, two teachers from Wilton High use different types of graphic organizers to help students organize information from their texts.

Teacher/ Assignment

Purpose

Graphic Organizer

Ms. Nor, 11th Grade, World History

Select a historical novel and summarize its key elements.

Ms. Nguyen provides a graphic organizer to assist some students with organizing and summarizing information from the historical novel.

Click to enlarge

(Close this panel)

Substances

Properties of Substance

Interactions with other substances

Atomic expression

(Close this panel)

Ms. Chesser, 10th Grade Chemistry

Be able to identify substances and their properties for an end-of-unit test.

Ms. Chesser provides a graphic organizer to assist students to organize their notes for an upcoming test.

Click to enlarge

When they use any kind of graphic organizer for the first time, content-area teachers need to explain its purpose and use. Teachers should model how to complete each section by verbalizing how to extract information from the written text and how to record it. With sufficient demonstration and guided practice, many students will be able to complete graphic organizers independently. In addition, allowing students to complete the graphic organizer with a partner or small group has the added benefit of creating opportunities to discuss the information, which in turn will help them to further clarify and reinforce the concepts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
IRIS | Page 11: Using Graphic Organizers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Graphic organizers are visual aids designed to help students organize substantial amounts of content information. In addition to being effective for vocabulary instruction, graphic organizers can also enhance reading comprehension by helping students to categorize information and to show the relationships among important concepts. There are many types of graphic organizers.