Presented by:

Kettely DeJesus

Educ 7202T

Dr. O’Connor-Petruso

Fall 2012

Reading Comprehension Interventions For Upper- Elementary and Middle School Students

Table of ContentsIntroduction

Statement of the Problem

Review of Related Literature

Statement of the Hypothesis

MethodsParticipants

Instruments

Experimental Design

Procedure

Results

Discussion

Implications

Statement of the Problem

National studies have revealed that significant numbers of adolescents and young adults do not adequately understand complex texts, which impedes their secondary success, access to postsecondary learning and opportunities within our increasingly competitive work environment. Data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) (Nov. 2011), states students’ reading comprehension is unchanged from 2009 at grade 4 but slightly improves at grade 8.

Problem…• Among higher and lower income families, scores were

higher in 2011 than in 2009 in grade 4, the average reading score in 2011 was unchanged from 2009 but 4 points higher than in 1992

• At grade 8, the average reading score in 2011 was 1 point higher than in 2009, and 5 points higher than in 1992

• Only 50% of students are ready to read and understand college-level text (ACT, 2006)

• Nationally, 25% of all adults are functionally illiterate (Moats, 2011)

•

Review of Literature

• Good readers tap their academic and nonacademic knowledge, monitor their comprehension, and pursue their goals even when confronted with challenging texts (Brown, 2008)

• Active readers employ a set of highly complex and well-developed skills and strategies used before, during and after reading (Vaughn & Klingner, 2011)

• Positive outcomes for students who are taught to use comprehension strategies (Vaughn et al., 2011)

• Authentic, targeted questions invite students application of the text to their experience (text-to-self connection) (Boyd & Rubin, 2006)

Review…• CSR is based on several related and converging

research literatures, including a theoretical foundation in cognitive psychology and sociocultural theory, research on good comprehenders, and research regarding effective practices from reading comprehension studies.

• CSR is theoretically grounded in cognitive psychology (Flavell, 1992; Palincsar & Brown, 1984) as well as sociocultural theory (Perez, 1998; Vygotsky, 1978). Harris and Pressley (1991) emphasized that comprehension strategy instruction can be improved when it utilizes these theoretical perspectives as foundational

• CSR involves specific skills such as previewing, “click, clunk,” “get the gist” and “wrap it up”

• When an individual's reading comprehension is more impaired than his or her listening comprehension, inaccurate and slow word recognition is the most likely cause (Shankweiler et al., 1999).

• Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR), intervention program of specific reading comprehension strategies increase student engagement

• Cunningham and Stanovich (1998) research 1st grade vocabulary knowledge predicts 30% of 11th grade comprehension

• Pressley’s (2001) finding that comprehension in grades 3 through 6 is often assessed but seldom taught

Review

Statement of the HypothesisH1: By integrating the Collaborative Strategic Reading,

approach into the activities within the literacy block (guided and independent reading), for thirty minutes a day for a period of over five (5) weeks, at public school X, in Brooklyn, New York, class of ELL students, class XXX will increase their reading comprehension, stamina, and fluency in reading. Students of class XXX will also increase writing ability.

H2: Transactional Strategies Instruction Approach to comprehension instruction can improve student comprehension. By integrating TSI, during social studies and science instruction, for 45 minutes, two (2) days a week, for a period of five (5) weeks, at public school X, in Brooklyn, NY, class of ELL students of class XXX will increase their reading comprehension, and writing ability.

Participants• 15 Sixth-Grade students attending P.S. X

in Brooklyn

• 8 males

• 7 females

• 11-12 year olds

• Bilingual (Haitian Creole) Self-Contained

• 3 students who scored level 3 on ELA (2010/11)

• 4 students who scored level 2+ (2010/11)

• 8 students who scored level 1-2 (2010/11)

Instruments• Consent forms: Principal,

Teacher, Parent/Guardian

• Surveys (Reading Comprehension, Demographics)

• Tests: ELA Reading, Listening, and Writing

• Non-Fiction Texts: (Social Studies; Science)

Experimental Design• Pre-experimental Design:

• One-Group Pretest-Posttest Design

Single group is pretested by reading traditional non-fiction trade text

• Exposed to the treatment (Collobarative Strategic Reading) Grouping; Assignments;

• Summarizing Text

• Post-tested after exposure to the treatment

• Symbolic Design OXO, (O’Connor-Petruso).

Threats to Internal /External Validity *History *Ecological Validity

*Maturation *Multiple Treatments

*Testing/Pre-Testing *Experimental Effects

*Sensitization *Specificity Variables

*Instrumentation

*Mortality

*Statistic Regression

*Differential Selection of Subjects

*Selection-Maturation Interaction

Procedure

• 2/6/12: Participants completed Student Surveys 1 and 2

• 2/15/12-2/17/12 Pretest administered

• 2/20/12 Participants introduced to Collaborative Strategic Reading During Social Studies and Science

• 3/26/12 Posttest administered

Pre-Test/Post –Test Results

Student’s Data

Student Name Pre-Test Score Post-Test Score

Student A 73 85

Student B 37 72

Student C 76 90

Student D 83 95

Student E 88 100

Student F 46 75

Student G 37 75

Student H 32 60

Student I 68 82

Student J 51 75

Student K 78 90

Student L 59 75

Student M 29 60

Student N 39 65

Student O 83 95

Central Tendencies

Students Pre-Test % Post-Test % % Change

Mean 59 80 21

Median 68 75 7

Mode 37, 83 75

Range 59 40

Results: Students Pre-Post Test Scores

Survey Results & Analysis

0.8687974rxy =0.86 indicating a very high positive correlation between independent reading and ELA test score.

Data Analysis…

-0.55217rxy=-0.55 which indicates a negative correlation with hours spent at the library has no effect on the high test scores.

ResultsStudent

Pre-Test

Post-Test

A 73 14 196 85 -5 25B 37 -22 484 72 -8 64C 76 -47 2209 90 10 100D 83 24 576 95 15 225E 88 29 841 100 20 400F 46 -13 169 75 -5 25G 37 -22 484 75 -5 25H 32 -27 729 60 -20 400I 68 9 81 82 2 4J 51 -8 64 75 -5 25K 78 -19 361 90 10 100L 59 0 0 75 -5 25M 29 -30 900 60 -20 400O 39 -20 400 65 -15 225P 83 24 576 95 -15 225

Mean 48

Variance: 538

Mean 49

Variance: 151.2

Pre-Test Scores SD =23.17 Post-Test Scores SD = 13.38

Discussions and Implications• Reading programs for ELLS should include

intensive language development as well as instruction in literacy strategies and skills (CSR)

• Extra practice in reading and peer collaboration should be provided for ELL’s

• Rather than the traditional teacher-dominated approach, CSR offers more opportunities for learners to participate more actively in constructing meaning and self-monitor their comprehension while reading

Implications….cont.• Through collaboration with others,

learners have more opportunities to confirm their understanding, ideas and clarify confusion and advance their thinking abilities

• Knowledge of the text should be consolidate through summaries and other strategies such as “Get the Gist” or “Wrap it Up” of CSR.

• Greater language proficiency is acquire through independent reading

References• Berkeley, S., Marshak, L., Mastropieri, M.A. and Scruggs, T.E. (2011).

Improving Student Comprehension of Social Studies Text: A Self-Questioning Strategy for Inclusive Middle Schools Classes. Remedial and Special Education, 32 (2), 105–113

• Burns, M., Hodgson, J., Parker, D., Fremont, K., (2011). Comparison of the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Text Previewing and Preteaching Keywords as Small-Group Reading Comprehension Strategies with Middle-School Students, Literacy Research and Instruction 50, 241-252.

• Hirsch, E.D. (2011). Beyond Comprehension (30-36): American Educator

• Hitchcock, J.H., Kurki, A., Wilkins, C., Dimino, J., Gersten, R., (2011). The Impact of Collaborative Strategic Reading on the Reading Comprehension of Grade 5 Students in Linguistically Diverse Schools Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 14 (2).

• Klingner, J., Vaughn, S., Arguelles, M., Hughes, M, Leftwich, S, (2004). Collaborative Strategic Reading: “Real-World” Lessons From Classroom Teachers, Remedial and Special Education 25, (5) 291-302.

• Luke, A., Dooley, K., Woods, A., (2011) Comprehension and content: Planning literacy in low socioeconomic and culturally diverse schools. The Australian Association for Research in Education

References cont…• O’Brien, D., Beach, R., Scharber, C., (2007). “Struggling” Middle

Schoolers: Engagement and Literate Competence in a Reading Writing Intervention Class, Reading Psychology 28, 51-73

• Palumbo, A., Loiacono, V., (2009) Understanding the Causes of Intermediate And Middle School Comprehension Problems. International Journal Of Special Education 24 (1), 75-81.

• Vaughn, S., Bryant, D. (2002) Reading Comprehension Interventions That Enhance Outcomes for English Language Learners with Learning Disabilities 1-8. Special Education Programs

• Vaughn, S., Klingner, J.K. and Bryant, D.P. (2001). Collaborative Strategic Reading as a Means to Enhance Peer Mediated Instruction for Reading Comprehension and Content-Area Learning. Remedial and Special Education, 22 (2), 66-74.

• Zoghi, M., Mustapha, R., Rizan T.N., Maasum, M. (2010). Collaborative Strategic Reading with University EFL Learners. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 41 (1).