This study explores the effects of 3 instructional methods: Picture Walks (Clay, 1991; Fountas & Pinnell, 1996), KWL (Ogle, 1986), and the Directed Reading-Thinking Activity (Stauffer, 1969) on the reading comprehension and science content acquisition of novice readers. The participants were 31 second-graders with an instructional reading level that was approaching grade level. A replicated Latin Square, within-subjects repeated measures design was employed that examined 4 treatments: 3 intervention groups (PW, KWL, DRTA) and a control group. The primary analysis evaluated treatment effects by conducting one-way repeated measures analyses of variance (ANOVA) on all measures, using the group as the unit of analysis. Results indicated that the picture walk and DRTA yielded statistically significant effects on reading growth as measured by a timed maze task. Analysis of Cued Recall indicated that the DRTA yielded statistically significant effects in reading comprehension and science content acquisition. KWL did not yield significant effects on measures of comprehension or content acquisition. Student interviews provided evidence that the participants possessed declarative, procedural, and conditional knowledge of the strategic processes that are the foundation for the 3 interventions, activation of prior knowledge, and prediction. However, the likelihood of the participants putting that knowledge to effective use seemed to be dependent upon the amount of teacher scaffolding provided by the instructional procedure.
References
1.
AdamsM. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print.Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
2.
AndersonR. C.FreebodyP. (1983). Reading comprehension and the assessment and acquisition of word knowledge. Advances in Reading/Language Research,2, 231–256.
3.
AndersonR. C.PearsonP. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading. In PearsonP. D. (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 255–292). White Plains, NY: Longman.
4.
BaumannJ. F.SchmittM. C. (1986). The what, why, how, and when of comprehension instruction. Reading Teacher,39(7), 640–646.
5.
BaumannJ. F.Seifert-KessellN.JonesL. A. (1992). Effect of think-aloud instruction on elementary students' comprehension monitoring abilities. Journal of Reading Behavior,24, 143–172.
6.
BiskinD. S.HoskissonK.ModlinM. (1976). Prediction, reflection, and comprehension. Elementary School Journal,77, 131–139.
7.
BlackJ. B. (1985). An exposition on understanding expository text. In BrittonB.BlackJ. B. (Eds.), Understanding expository text: A theoretical and practical handbook for analyzing expository text (pp. 249–267). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8.
BryanJ. (1998). K-W-W-L: Questioning the known. The Reading Teacher,51(7), 618–620.
9.
CantrellR. J.FusaroJ.DoughertyE. A. (2000). Exploring the effectiveness of journal writing on learning social studies: A comparative study. Reading Psychology,21, 1–11.
10.
CarrE.OgleD. M. (1987). KWL plus: A strategy for comprehension and summarization. Journal of Reading,30, 626–631.
11.
ChallJ. S. (1996). Stages of reading development (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt-Brace.
12.
ClayM. M. (1991). Introducing a new storybook to young readers. The Reading Teacher,45, 264–273.
13.
ClayM. M. (1993). Reading recovery: A guidebook for teachers in training.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
14.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15.
DavidsonJ. L.WilkersonB. C. (1988). Directed Reading-Thinking Activities.Monroe, NY: Trillium Press.
16.
DoleJ. A.SinatraG. M. (1998). Reconceptualizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educational Psychologist,33, 109–128.
17.
DuffyG. (1993). Rethinking strategy instruction: Four teachers' development and their low achievers' understanding. The Elementary School Journal,93, 231–247.
18.
DukeN. K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly,35, 202–224.
19.
DukeN. K. (2002, July). Improving comprehension of informational text. Paper presented at the Third Annual CIERA Summer Institute, Ann Arbor, MI.
20.
FountasI. C.PinnellG. S. (1996). Guided reading: Good first teaching for all children.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
21.
GambrellL. B.KoskinenP. S.KapinusB. A. (1991). Retelling and the reading comprehension of proficient and less-proficient readers. Journal of Educational Research,84, 356–362.
22.
GaskinsI. W.AndersonR. C.PressleyM.CunicelliE.SatlowE. (1993). Six teachers' dialogue during cognitive process instruction. The Elementary School Journal,93, 277–304.
23.
GaskinsI.GuthrieJ. T.SatlowE.OstertagF.SixL.ByrneJ.ConnerB. (1994). Integrating instruction of science and reading, and writing: Goals, teacher development, and assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,31, 1039–1056.
24.
GuthrieJ. T.CoxK. (1998). Portrait of an engaging classroom: Principles of Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction for diverse students. In HarrisK. (Ed.), Teaching every child every day: Learning in diverse schools and classrooms (pp. 70–130). Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
25.
GuzzettiB. J.SnyderT. E.GlassG. V.GamasW. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly,28, 116–159.
26.
HansenJ. (1981). The effects of inference training and practice on young children's reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly,16, 391–417.
27.
HasbrouckJ.TindalG. A. (2006). Oral reading fluency norms: A valuable assessment tool for reading teachers. The Reading Teacher,59(7), 636–644.
28.
HuckS. W. (2000). Reading statistics and research. New York: Longman.
29.
JettonT.RupleyW. H.WillsonV. L. (1995). Comprehension of narrative and expository texts: The role of content, topic, discourse, and strategy knowledge. In HinchmanK. A.LeuD. J.KinzerC. K. (Eds.), Perspectives on literacy research and practice, 44th Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 197–204). Chicago: National Reading Conference.
30.
KendeouP.van den BroekP. (2005). The effects of readers' misconceptions on comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology,97, 235–245.
31.
KintschW. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
32.
KucanL.BeckI. L. (1996). Four fourth graders thinking aloud: An investigation of genre effects. Journal of Literacy Research,28, 259–287.
33.
MaxwellS. E.DelaneyH. D. (2000). Designing experiments and analyzing data.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34.
McKeownM. G.BeckI. L. (2003). Taking advantage of read-alouds to help children make sense of decontextualized language. In van KleeckA.StahlS. A.BauerE. B. (Eds.), On reading books to children (pp. 159–176). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35.
McLainK. V. M. (1990, December). Effects of two comprehension monitoring strategies on the metacognitive awareness and reading achievement of third and fifth grade students. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, Miami, FL.
36.
NarvaezD. (2002). Individual differences that influence reading comprehension. In BlockC. C.PressleyM. (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based practices (pp. 158–175). New York: The Guilford Press.
37.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). (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. (NIH Publication No. 004769). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office. Available: http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org.
38.
NelsonK. (1996). Language in cognitive development: Emergence of the mediated mind.New York: Cambridge University Press.
39.
OgleD. M. (1986). KWL: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. Reading Teacher,39(6), 564–570.
40.
PalincsarA. S. (1986). The role of dialogue in providing scaffolded instruction. Educational Psychologist,21, 73–98.
41.
PalincsarA. S. (2002, July). Reciprocal teaching: Twenty years later. Paper presented at the Third Annual CIERA Summer Institute, Ann Arbor, MI.
42.
PalincsarA. S.MagnussonS. J.CollinsK. M.CutterJ. (2001). Making science accessible to all: Results of a design experiment in inclusive classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly,21, 15–32.
43.
ParisS. G. (2005). Re-interpreting the development of reading skills. Reading Research Quarterly,40, 184–202.
44.
ParisS. G.CarpenterR. D.ParisA. H.HamiltonE. E. (2005). Spurious and genuine correlates of children's reading comprehension. In ParisS. G.StahlS. A. (Eds.), Children's reading comprehension and assessment (pp. 131–160). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
45.
ParisS. G.LipsonM. Y.WixsonK. K. (1983). Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psychology,8, 293–316.
46.
ParkerR. I.HasbrouckJ. E. (1992). The maze as a classroom-based reading measure: Construction methods, reliability, and validity. The Journal of Special Education,26, 195–218.
47.
PearsonP. D.GallagherM. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology,8, 317–344.
48.
PetersonB. (1991). Selecting books for beginning readers. In DeFordD. E.LyonsC. A.PinnellG. S. (Eds.), Bridges to literacy: Learning from Reading Recovery (pp. 119–147). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
49.
PiperS. G. (1992). A metacognitive skills/reading comprehension intervention program for sixth grade social studies students. Unpublished dissertation, Nova University.
50.
ReutzelD. R.HollingsworthP. M. (1991). Using literature webbing for books with predictable narrative: Improving young readers' prediction, comprehension and story structure knowledge. Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly,12, 319–333.
51.
SchwanenflugelP. J.MeisingerE. B.WisenbakerJ. M.KuhnM. R.StraussG. P.MorrisR. D. (2006). Becoming a fluent and automatic reader in the early elementary school years. Reading Research Quarterly,41, 496–522.
52.
ShelleyA. C.BridwellB.HyderL.LedfordN.PattrsonP. (1997). Revisiting the KWL: What we knew; what we wanted to know; what we learned. Reading Horizons,37, 233–242.
53.
ShinJ.DenoS. L.EspinC. (2000). Technical adequacy of the maze task for curriculum-based measurement of reading growth. The Journal of Special Education,34, 164–172.
54.
SmolkinL. B.DonovanC. (2001). The contexts of comprehension: The information book read-aloud, comprehension acquisition, and comprehension instruction in a first-grade classroom. The Elementary School Journal,102, 97–122.
55.
SnowC. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R & D program in reading comprehension.Washington, DC: Rand Corporation.
56.
StahlS. A.HeubachK. M. (2005). Fluency-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Literacy Research,37, 25–60.
57.
StanovichK. E.CunninghamA. E. (1993). Where does knowledge come from? Specific associations between print exposure and information acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology,85, 211–229.
58.
StaufferR. G. (1969). Directing reading maturity as a cognitive process.New York: Harper and Row.
59.
StaufferR. G.HammondW. D.OehlkersW. J.HousemanA. (1976). Effectiveness of a language-arts and basic reader approach to first grade reading instruction—extended into sixth grade. In StaufferR. G. (Ed.), Action research in L. E. A. instructional procedures (pp. 166–203). Newark, DE: University of Delaware.
60.
TaylorB. M.PearsonP. D.GarciaG. E.StahlK. A. D.BauerE. B. (2006). Improving students' reading comprehension. In StahlK. A. D.McKennaM. C. (Eds.), Reading research at work: Foundations of effective practice (pp. 303–315). New York: The Guilford Press.
61.
TaylorB. M.PearsonP. D.PetersonD. S.RodriguezM. C. (2005). The CIERA school change framework: An evidence-based approach to professional development and school reading improvement. Reading Research Quarterly,40, 40–69.
62.
van den BroekP.RappD. N.KendeouP. (2005). Integrating memory-based and constructionist processes in accounts of reading comprehension. Discourse Processes,39, 299–316.
63.
VanSledrightB. A. (1992). Teaching about the American Revolution: The case of Sara Atkinson (Elementary Subjects Series No. 69): Center for the Learning and Teaching of Elementary Subjects, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
64.
VosniadouS. (2003). Exploring the relationships between conceptual change and intentional learning. In SinatraG. M.PintrichP. R. (Eds), Intentional conceptual change.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
65.
VosniadouS.IoannidesC.DimitrakopoulouA.PapademetriouF. (2002). Designing learning environments to promote conceptual change in science. Retrieved January 25, 2006, from http://www.cs.phs.uoa.gr/en/staff/vosniadou.html.
66.
VygotskyL. (1978). Mind in society.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
67.
WillsonV. L.RupleyW. H. (1997). A structural equation model for reading comprehension based on background, phonemic and strategy knowledge. Scientific Studies of Reading,1, 45–64.
