Literature Review: Questioning, a Strategy for Reading Comprehension

Case Based Response
I. Background knowledge is important for S because it can help a reader comprehend a passage. If the reader knows enough about the subject they can use what they know to predict what is happening in the text.
II. Attached assessment sheets.
III. Rationale
a. S is a fourth grader, however, his third grade teacher said that he reads at a first grade level. Based on this evaluation the assessor chose to start two levels below at the pre-primer. Starting at a lower level is a way to assure that the student starts out successfully and to find their base independent level.
b. The assessor stopped administering the word lists mid way through the fifth grade word list because the student did not know most of the words. I would have stopped at the fourth grade list which was scored as at S’s frustration level. It would not be appropriate to move on in the lists because it would frustrate the student and possibly skew the rest of the assessment. Furthermore, we are looking for the student’s highest independent reading level making it unnecessary to move on in the word lists.
c. The assessor chose to start S reading the first grade passage. S’s highest independent level on the word lists was the second grade reading lists. I would have started him reading at his highest independent level which would mean starting him at the second grade passage.
d. S read the level one passage at an independent level, level two he read at an instructional level. The assessor continued to find S’s highest instructional level. Although he scored at an instructional level all the through level four, because his word list was frustrational at level four his highest instructional level would be third grade. His success with reading the fourth grade passage tells that he is comprehending above his word identification level.
IV. Explanation to parents
After being assessed with the QRI4 we have identified some of S’s strengths and weaknesses as a reader. Although evaluation of S’s word identification suggests that S working at a second grade level independently, his ability to use his background knowledge, other word identification skills is allowing him to comprehend at a higher reading level. I recommend that most of S’s time spent reading alone be at a first grade reading level. However, in class where he can receive vocabulary support, S’s instructional level should be at a third grade level. S’s ability to create meaning from texts will be a great asset to him as we help him improve his word identification skills.

One way to encourage such reformulation of ideas is to teach the use of metacognitive questioning strategies. Questioning strategies cause readers to think more deeply about new information, stimulating thought process for problem solving and imaginative thinking (Williamson, 1996). Teacher-led questioning activities have been present in curriculum since the beginning of American education; new exploration using questioning shows that explicit instruction of self-questioning techniques can provide metacognitive focus for improved reading comprehension that authentically engages students in way that teacher-led questioning does not (Gauthier, 2000). A reformed approach to reading instruction should include explicit instruction of metacognitive reading strategies, like questioning, in authentic student-driven contexts.

Traditional Use of Questioning in Reading Instruction
Questions can provide academic focus and coherence for an entire curriculum (Gauthier, 2000); the imperative role of questions in the classroom has been proven by research, and of course, by time. Questioning in reading instruction has largely been approached as a series of questions meant to measure comprehension which are answered following reading (Durkin, 1978-1979). Commonly these questions are created by the teacher or taken from the basal reader (Lloyd, 2004). In the case of both the basal and teacher created questions, instructors often spend time creating and posing thoughtful higher order thinking questions only to find that the students are uninterested and unengaged in answering the queries (Lloyd, 2004). Many students read as passive recipients allowing the text to “wash over them” instead of making connections to the text or delving beyond surface level in support of their understanding; in short, passive readers answer questions the teacher created in the way the teacher thought they should (Zimmermann & Keene, 2007 . Lloyd, 2004). Furthermore, there is little instruction in the traditional format of a series of questions following reading selection. Educators using this traditional model are assessing their students' understanding, but students are not being taught how to improve their reading comprehension by asking questions of their own (Durkin, 1978-1979).

Authentic Student Questions
In contrast to teacher driven questioning, incorporating student generated questions into literacy instruction addresses assessment needs of the teacher while increasing the motivation of students. Furthermore, authentic student-developed questions can enhance comprehension by “fostering a synthesis of concepts through practical application” and focus on main ideas (Gauthier, 2000). Student responsibility for questioning still provides the focus of guiding questions (Gauthier, 2000), but by generating and using self-questioning techniques the curriculum is enriched with beneficial comprehension instruction and increased student motivation (Durkin, 1978-1979. Lloyd, 2004). Through the process of asking authentic questions “literature discussions become more than an activity in which the reader is responsible for finding a specific predetermined meaning of the text. The questions invite students to interpret the text by illustrating the meaning and acknowledging the valuable insights each reader brings to the text." (Lloyd, 2004)
Teachers and researchers investigating the use of authentic questioning used for comprehension instruction reported more attentive classes who thought more deeply about the text, using their questions and discussion to interpret, evaluate, and synthesize (Gauthier, 2000. Lloyd, 2004). Students reported that having control of the discussion was more challenging and interesting; many reflected that questioning promotes active reading. (Lloyd, 2004) Sharing questions in small groups and as a class also contributed improving student comprehension. Participating in questioning activities students generated questions, but also listened to other student questions and responses further expanding “the network of cognitive connections needed for understanding text" (Gauthier, 2000). Using authentic questions in the curriculum is a powerful tool for teaching reading comprehension, engaging students in literature discussions, along with assessing student creation of meaning from text.

Explicit Instruction of Metacognitive Strategies
Explicit instruction of comprehension strategies keeps the key features of literacy instruction such as read alouds, small group literature discussions, and reflective writing but shifts the control of these elements from the teacher to center around student thinking. Instead the comprehension strategy instruction uses the gradual release of responsibility model to beginning with the techniques that provides the most support moving towards independent practice (Lloyd, 2004. Zimmermann & Keene, 2007). To begin teachers start with reading aloud from an engaging text (Zimmermann & Keene, 2007). Read alouds have many benefits for students including building concepts of print, generating interest in literature, and aiding academic vocabulary development (Myers, 2005). In addition to these benefits educators can add the opportunity to introduce comprehension strategies by modeling through think alouds (Myers, 2005). For several lessons students observe teacher think alouds before practicing the strategies themselves first as a whole group then as a small group, and finally independently. The intention behind using the gradual release model is for students to turn these strategies into metacognitive reading skills (Afflerbach, 2008. Zimmermann & Keene, 2007).
As with any instruction method, this formula for gradual release instruction of comprehension strategies is not teacher or student proof solutions. Problems arise and the curriculum should shift in order to respond and improve student discussion. Research suggests that problems arising during instruction can be addressed by discussion and with student created solutions (Lloyd, 2004). For example, at the beginning of questioning instruction many student asked simple explicit questions emulating the years of basal or teacher-driven questions they were used to in traditional curriculum (Lloyd, 2004. Myers, 2005). To encourage students to delve deeper with their questions students should discuss the many types of questions learning to distinguish “thick” and “thin” questions looking to ask questions that are open ended and require critical thinking (Myers, 2005). In addition, it is important that students discuss the transition of questioning strategy to a reading comprehension skill, practiced independently (Afflerbach, 2008). Prolonged discussion and use of a single strategy can become “intrusive and cumbersome to the accomplished reader” (Lloyd, 2004). Strategy instruction was found to be most useful when individual strategies are not over used (Gauthier, 2000). Repeated practice is necessary to ensure mastery of strategies, but open discussion with students about this need for repetition along with self-assessment of their thinking can help instructors determine the pace of instruction (Lloyd, 2004).
Conclusion
Student-driven contexts for reading instruction provide authentic contexts that motivate students, increase their understanding of text, encourage active reading, assess and teach reading comprehension where historical models only assessed comprehension and propagated passive reading (Durkin, 1978-1979. Lloyd, 2004. King, 1994). Adding questioning strategies to students' metacognitive tool box stimulates thought process for improved understanding, problem solving imaginative thinking (Williamson, 1996). Instruction of metacognitive comprehension strategies using gradual release of responsibility supports transition of a reading strategy to reading skill implemented independent for improved life long reading comprehension. This reformed method of reading instruction addresses the complexity of reading comprehension assisting the large numbers of students who are able to decode, but not understand what they have read (Myers, 2005).


Bibliography
Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P. D., & Paris, S. G. (2008). “Clarifying Differences Between Reading Skills and Reading Strategies”. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 364-373.

Durkin, Dolores (1978-19879) "What Classroom Observations Reveal About Reading Comprehension Instruction". Reading Research Quarterly,14(4), 481-533.

Gauthier, L. R. (2000). “The Role of Questioning: Beyond Comprehension's Front Door”. Reading Horizons, 40(4), 239-252.

Lloyd, S. L. (2004). “Using Comprehension Strategies as a Springboard for Student Talk”. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(2), 114-124.

Myers, P. A. (2005). “The Princess Storyteller, Clara Clarifier, Quincy Questioner, and the Wizard: Reciprocal teaching adapted for kindergarten students”. International Reading Association, 314-324.

King, A. (1994). “Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain”. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338-368.


Zimmermann, S., & Keene, E. O. (2007). Mosaic of Thought: The Power of Comprehension Strategy Instruction (2nd ed.). Heinemann.

Comprehension

What is Comprehension?
"Teaching comprehension is the inner conversation the reader has with text where understanding takes root, meaning is constructed, and knowledge is acquired." (Stephanie Harvey)


Supporting Comprehension:

• provide reading material for individual reading about topic
• support for comprehending piece of text:
  

1. motivation
2. word id
3. build background

If you provide support for one piece of text it doesnt mean a student could they could comprehend any text.

Must provide:

• Reading Practice (students get better at reading by reading!)
  
• Support for a particular text (Before, During, After)
  
• Explicit instruction in strategies for comprehending any piece of text. (
  

Homophones, Homographs, Homonyms

Phonics:
Homonyms: same spelling and pronunciation different meaning (hand, plot, serve, train)

• Here is my hand. Hand in your paper.

Homographs: same spelling, different pronunciation and meaning (close, wind, lead)

• Wind the clock.
• The wind is strong.
  

Homophone: same pronunciation different spelling and meaning (profit, prophet; to, two, too)

• Would you like to dance?

• The door is made of wood.

Word Identification Strategy: Instructional Methods

Sight Word Books
www.msrossbec.com/dolchwb.pdf
Assess on a dolch list, highlight words they knew, leave blank the words they didn't know. Then create a sight word book with sentences that use the words. Twice a week student would receive instruction on the words he did not know.

Instruction was on words they did not know went like this:

• see if they knew the words
• if not tell them the word, then give them the page to read silently at their desk.
• when student was ready would come read the word from the list.
• Practice with parents, bring back with signature.
• The next day call up to re-assess. if he couldn't he would take them home again and practice.

Word Train (Begin, Middle, End of a word)
Connect the sounds in the words to the cars in a train. Beginning sounds were the engine, middle sounds with cars, and ending sounds were caboose.

Prefixes
Note cards with each prefix, then add to note cards of sight words.

Word Identification (Strategies, Instruction, Needs)

Elements of Skilled Performance Review
1. Word Identification
2. Vocabulary
3. Fluency
4. Comprehension

All of our instruction should lead to COMPREHENSION even if you are teaching an individual element of skilled performance. In the end it is instruction to help comprehension.

Word Identification IS NOT Vocabulary Development

Word ID is decoding familiar words quickly and unfamiliar words rapidly enough that meaning is not interrupted (fluency)

Vocabulary is knowing the meaning of words and knowing how to find the meaning of unfamiliar words.

Word Identification Strategies (Identifying the word "passages")

1. Sight Word (you know and recognize the word passages, you have it in your word bank)
2. Phonics (using letter sounds to decode a word "paaasssaaggess")
3. Structural analysis (breaking into syllables, "pass-ages")
4. Morphemic (break down word into understandable parts "pass"-"age"-"s")
5. Phone a friend (ask a parent or teacher)
6. Context (using the meaning of the words around it to make sense of a word)
7. Using pictures (using context, and what you know about the illustration to guess the word)
8. Analogy (compare it to another word that looks the same)

Fluency

1. word recognition accuracy: automaticity
2. appropriate speed
   
3. proper expression
4. grouping words into meaningful phrase units

Impacts comprehension, and comprehension impacts fluency

Bottom-up (Phonics) vs. Top-down (Whole Language)

Phonics starts with phoneme/grapheme level, focused on phonics generalization.

Whole language works at whole text level. focused on meaning.

What we need is a balance approach.

Identifying word identification needs:

• performance on a word list (phonics and sight words)
• performance on connected text (strategies)
• miscue analysis (patterns in identification)
• reading/developmental level (different by age, background)

Instructional guidelines for quality word recognition instruction:

• Focus on the goal of reading: COMPREHENSION
• Teach phonemic awareness and phonics early and efficiently
• Teach students to take advantages of pattern and analogies (teach letter patterns).
  
• Provide intervention early when needed

What should you do when a student gets stuck on a word?

It really all depends, but start out by waiting to see what they will do. Consider first the purpose of reading, how meaning is interrupted, the students reactions/frustration level, ect... Almost always "waiting" is a good thing to start with. See what they do, then try these strategies:

1. WAIT (what are they doing? are they looking at you to tell them? are they using a strategy?)
2. Prompt to use an appropriate strategy that you have taught (Phonics/Morpheme, Context, Pictures)
3. If none of them work, tell them the word.

What should you do when a student miscues a word?

Again, it all depends but:

Don't jump on the student, avoid making them fell frustrated.
At the end of the line ask them if that made sense.
If they don't notice the miscue and it interrupts meaning, correct the word.
If it doesn't interrupt meaning consider not correcting the word, have you taught the letter sounds? is it a vocabulary word?

Mental Imagery Abstract

Gambrell, L., & Bales, R. (1986). “Mental Imagery and the Comprehension-Monitoring Performance of Fourth- and Fifth Grade Poor Readers” . Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 454-464.

This study investigated the influence of mental imagery instruction on 124 fourth and fifth grade students. The students had been identified as two or more years below grade level in reading. The students were split into control and treatment groups. Readers in the control group were given mental imagery instructions, while the control group received general instructions. Both groups silently read two passages, one with an explicit inconsistency and the other with an implicit inconsistency. After reading the students completed a prompted re-tell and filled out a 10-item survey designed to obtain information about their comprehension of the inconsistencies. Data from these instruments were used to measure the effect of mental imagery on both monitoring and regulation of reading comprehension.

Visual Response 6: Mosaics of Thought

Reading Response 6: Mosaic of Thought

“ Todd established four small areas near the corners of his classroom… The dramatic group performed a theatrical interpretation of the scene; the artists went to work to represent their images with paint, pencils, or pastels; the book talk group shared and expanded upon each other’s images; and in the writer’s den, images were recorded and shared” (Keene and Zimmerman, 191).


I want my classroom to be like this!!!

I love that they explained the process Todd went through to build this environment. So often pre-service teachers see the finished product and not the struggle to get there. I feel like it makes us less likely to take chances because we “don’t know how to do it”. In reality we will never completely know how to do it! There will always be a challenge to fit the individual needs of our students (although I am sure it gets easier with more tools in the toolbox). The different expression centers are a great example of meeting needs authentically. Sometimes a reader could have a strong image perfect to draw, and other days they may feel better discussing it. The best part about these different centers is that they allow for each reader to respond in the way that works for them, and the way that works best for each book! I really appreciate how this solution acknowledges the interactive nature of reading and reflects that dialogue in the assessment and instruction in addition to the process of reading.

Reading Response 5: Mosaic of Thought and Strategies that Work

“Ellin reminded herself that children’s responses are nearly always worth the wait, and that silence, though uncomfortable for the adults, can lead to great thinking” (Keene and Zimmerman, 152).

There are a lot of reasons I want to be a teacher and Ellin’s thoughts above hit the first reason right on the head. I am so amazed by children’s responses. I love how amazingly unique and creative they can be when given the chance to solve a problem. This quote made me reflect on my own teaching. How am I giving my students chances to solve problems? And if I am giving the opportunities they need, am I giving them the wait time and the voice to really examine their thinking? I am not sure that I give enough self-reflection time to my students. Even if I can’t give them enough time to each talk to the class one by one, I could give them a few moments to “turn and talk” like on the video we watched in class, or write down their ideas before we start our class discussion.

“Kids taste, touch, feel, and smell their way through books as well as through experiences. So we model using all of our senses to understand what we read, hear, and view” (Harvey and Goudvis, 149).

This is central to what I believe students learn from art making. We experience the world with site, sound, touch, taste, and smell. Limiting activities to one learning style to me is like how my favorite food tastes when my nose is all stuffed up. Allowing students to express their learning through all of their senses enriches learning. When students have a chance to create something using what they learned and what they know from their experience it strengthens their connections to the material. The more connections they can make with information the better able they will be to hang on to it.

Reading Response 4: Mosaic of Thought

“Questions reveal far more about children’s thinking than do pat answers, hastily delivered. Questions slow us down and help us focus on what is truly important” (Keene and Zimmerman, 135).

I am working with a student right now who has been struggling with the arts appreciation course. She has a test Thursday and says she is “good” and doesn’t need any help. However, when I ask her what the test is going to be on she replies, “I don’t know, the teacher hasn’t gone over anything really”. I assured her that the teacher definitely thinks they have gone over something in class or she wouldn’t be having a test. I am finding some unique challenges in working with this student that the reading hit upon this week. How do I help her generate questions? The teacher made fun of her at the beginning of the semester and she has since checked out. She isn’t curious about the class, and she isn’t sure if she can trust me enough to admit she is struggling with the material. She needs the same sort of support that Char’s first graders did, but a different approach. How do I get her curious, or motivate, or even just over how much she doesn’t like her professor so that she can get through the course? Most importantly, how do I help her ask her own questions while she is reading about the art?

Strategy Response 3: Mosaic of Thought, and Strategies That Work

“Questions reveal far more about children’s thinking than do pat answers, hastily delivered. Questions slow us down and help us focus on what is truly important” (Keen and Zimmerman, 135).

I am working with a student right now who has been struggling with the arts appreciation course. She has a test Thursday and says she is “good” and doesn’t need any help. However, when I ask her what the test is going to be on she replies, “I don’t know, the teacher hasn’t gone over anything really”. I assured her that the teacher definitely thinks they have gone over something in class or she wouldn’t be having a test. I am finding some unique challenges in working with this student that the reading hit upon this week. How do I help her generate questions? The teacher made fun of her at the beginning of the semester and she has since checked out. She isn’t curious about the class, and she isn’t sure if she can trust me enough to admit she is struggling with the material. She needs the same sort of support that Char’s first graders did, but a different approach. How do I get her curious, or motivate, or even just over how much she doesn’t like her professor so that she can get through the course? Most importantly, how do I help her ask her own questions while she is reading about the art?

“Authentic questions, whether asked b y students or teachers,
• prompt thinking
• don’t always have one right answer
• may have many answers
• cause us to ponder and wonder
• dispel or clarify confusion
• challenge us to rethink our opinions
• lead us to seek out further information
• are subject to discussion debate and conversation
• may require further research” (Harvey and Goudvis, 124)

Harvey and Goudvis are challenging educators to move beyond teaching for rote memorization and to start to ask students to think. As I was reading this I started to think that even if teachers were just asking “Why do you think that?” after a student gave an answer we would be encouraging more critical thinking. If they are thinking about their answer, and in addition about support for their answer they are thinking more metacognitively, and there is more potential for discussion as classmates as they evaluate the rationale behind their own answers. I appreciated how focused this chapter was on questions instead of answers, especially the section talking about authenticity. I see authentic questions as a way to bring instruction back to being about the individual students in your class a great way to offset the standardized focus of so many things that happen in schools.

Reading Response 1: Mosaic of Thought and Strategies That Work

“For better or worse, we all learn the most from adversity, not just as readers, but in the wider circles of our lives…Learning to monitor for meaning and make ongoing revisions as we’re confronted with new information is not only a reading skill, but a life skill, and the feeling of accomplishment when we break through to understanding is hard to beat.” (Keene and Zimmermann, p. 63).

My life has been full of revisions! From the career path I chose to the number of layers I wear on any given day. As I collect more information my opinion has changed. What I enjoyed most about this chapter was how the authors broke down ways that good readers monitor their comprehension. So much of these strategies have become second nature for me that I am afraid I won’t know how to break them down and teach them to students. The skills are so invisible to me that until being pointed out to me in literacy courses I had very little understanding of why/how someone could struggle as a reader. When I read about Chris and Kristin talking about their thinking with students, I kept noticing myself thinking, “oh I do that!” and, more excitingly, “I could teach that!”. It gives me a lot of hope to see what once seemed to be a “you have it or you don’t” ability broken down in to achievable strategies. Its not magic, its metacognition!


“Only when readers listen to their inner voice will they notice when they stray from an active inner conversation with the text.” (Harvey and Goudvis, p. 79)

Calling attention to our thinking is important. However, it is not enough to stop at pointing out that our mind wanders when we read. What I enjoyed in the chapter was the idea of creating a chart of problems and solutions. Here is an example of how monitoring meaning is a lifeskill! Especially in the electronic age, it is most important to me that my students learn to learn. I know adults who when faced with a problem just sit back and complain. Understanding that life is full of challenges, and then looking for solutions to challenges instead of being stumped by a roadblock is certainly a valuable skill for adults (and one that gets you a lot farther than whining!).