Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

John T. Guthrie University of Maryland. Portrait of engagement Major findings & history Roles in processing Classroom contexts (CORI +) Policy – present.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "John T. Guthrie University of Maryland. Portrait of engagement Major findings & history Roles in processing Classroom contexts (CORI +) Policy – present."— Presentation transcript:

1 John T. Guthrie University of Maryland

2 Portrait of engagement Major findings & history Roles in processing Classroom contexts (CORI +) Policy – present and future (?)

3 Meanings: Behavioral –doing reading actively Motivational –reasons for reading Cognitive –deep processing Social –interpersonal interaction Knowledge –as generator and enhancement

4 Meaning--JG: Active reading (behavior) that is strategic (cognitive), internally motivated (motivation), knowledge driven (cognitive), and socially interactive (social). Disengaged reading? Yes, Time on task or eyes on page? No

5 OriginsHow does engaged reading develop? Self-determination theory (internalization) External goalYou read this book (-) Introjected goalIll read if I have to (-) Identified goalRead. helps me (+) Intrinsic goalI enjoy reading (+)

6 OriginsHow does engaged reading develop? Socio-cultural theory (socialization) Literacy practices are negotiated in a social context (Gee) Social affordances shape cognitive competencies (Scribner & Cole) Social interactions enable motivations to occur and develop (Pianta, others)

7 Portrait of engagement Major findings & history Roles in processing and readership Classroom contexts Policy – present and future (?)

8 PsychInfo (Reading; Literacy Motivation; Engagement) ERICCombined 2955 852811483 less 20% 9186

9 Major research finding #1 Amount of engaged reading correlates with reading achievement, higher than gender, family income, parental education. Engaged readers from Mothers with H.S. education achieve higher than disengaged readers from Mothers with College education. Engaged 8 th graders in poverty achieve higher than disengaged 12 th graders in affluence. Guthrie, NAEP9 year olds in USA. Kirsch, PISA 2000 ---15 year olds in 30 countries.

10 Major finding #2 Reciprocal determination Motivation (self-efficacy; intrinsic mot.) and achievement spiral upward and downward. For Primary grades K-2; For intermediate grades 3-5 (Finnish studies; self-determination studies; self- concept studies; Morgan & Fuchs EC) Matthew effectStanovichrich get richer because they get more motivated

11 Major finding #3 Motivations drive engagement (behavioral and cognitive) True for internal motivations interest, intrinsic, pleasure Not true for external Grades, competition. Why Grades ?

12 Affirming 1. Intrinsic motivation 2. Autonomy/ Ownership 3. Self-efficacy 4. Social accept. 5. Mastery goals Undermining 1. Avoidance 2. Lack of Ownership 3. Perceived difficulty 4. Social rejection 5. Performance avoidance

13 Major finding #4 Classroom practices increase reading motivations that drive engagement. Short term30 minutes Long term---16 weeks Professional development can increase practices Multi-methods: Observational, Correlational, Experimental

14 Affirming motivations 1. Intrinsic 2. Ownership 3. Self-efficacy 4. Social acceptance 5. Mastery goals Classroom practices 1. Relevance 2. Micro-choice 3. Success 4. RelationsT & S 5. Thematic units

15 Major finding #5 Variation across ethnic groups Intrinsic motivation increases achievement (correlationaland experimental evidence) Confirmed for Caucasian and Asian students Doubtful (initially disconfirmed) for African American and Hispanic students

16 Major finding #5 Variation across ethnic groups Avoidance is well associated with low achievement for African American students (Ogbu, 2003; Graham, 2006; Guthrie, 2007; Long, 2007) Avoidance has moderate-low correlation with achievement for Caucasian (Baker, 1999; Meece, 1993) Cultural, experiential, educational sources are probable.

17 NRRC---1992 Georgia – Maryland Alvermann – Guthrie Co-Directors Thematic Center

18 Contributors to literature QualitativeAlvermann, Moje, OBrien, Dillon, Brozo, Gee, Ivey, Fink, Au, Taylor, Pearson, Taylor, Smith, Morrow, Bean, Rueda, Pressley, others QuantitativeGuthrie, Skinner, Deci, Almasi, Gambrell, Blumenfeld, Otis, Unrau, Greene, Baker, Pianta, Wentzel, Lapola, Wigfield, others

19 Paradigm of research for engagement ? Epistemologybeliefs, methods, findings Multiple paradigmsmultiple speech communities Mixed methodsdeterred by dysfunctions in publication system; Journal Ano voices Journal Bno numbers Engagement research is incrementalist; Engagement fuses with cognitive and socio-cultural knowledge base in reading Paradigm sharing rather than paradigm shift

20 Portrait of engagement Major findings & history Roles in processing Classroom contexts (CORI +) Policy – present and future (?)

21 How does motivation (value, belief, goal) impact cognitive systems of reading? 1. Cognitive effort, attention, persistence Self-efficacy increases resilience Social acceptance increases trying hard Perceived control (ownership) increases perseverance

22 How does motivation (value, belief, goal) impact cognitive systems of reading? 2. Motivation ELICITS existing cognitive and metacognitive strategies; such as activating knowledge, organizing, on-line summarizing, self-monitoring Internally motivated student seeks understanding; externally motivated student seeks task completion.

23 How does motivation (value, belief, goal) impact cognitive systems of reading? 3. Affective link to text memoryHow? Internally motivated S. has positive affective link to text feature (character, concept) Feature with affective link is salient, e.g., retrievable Feature with affective link is generative, e.g., feature connects to other features with pos. link. Evidence - ?

24 Upward spiral for: motivation, readership, knowledge, achievement Internal motivation propels high volume of reading Amount of reading fosters knowledge growth(West & Stanovich) Knowledge generates reading achievement. Downward spiral occurs alsosee graph next

25 Gain in Read. Comprehension Grade Level Low Interest Increased Efficacy or Involvement High Interest 6.0 4.0 2.0 0

26 Portrait of engagement Major findings & history Roles in processing and readership Classroom contexts (CORI +) Policy – present and future (?)

27 Terrarium (students fill) Aquarium (students fill) Owl pellet dissection Ant farm Grow grass from seeds Crack nuts Observe bird feathers

28 Teacher affords student selection of text, task, partner, expression, link. Select story.. Select page to read.. Select sentences to explain.. Identify goal for day.. Choose 3 of 5 questions to answer.. Write 3 inferences as true/false items for partner exchange..

29 Teacher strongly controls text, task, partner, expression, link to outside. Teacher selects all text Teacher questions are only questions Student predictsonly on request Teacher starts, stops all reading Text is right; student opinion is not Best answers are right or wrong

30 Students work together to gain meaning from text, and share Partners read aloud Partner question exchange Team summarize chapter Literature circles Idea circles (CORI) Jig sawhabitat teams; Peer editing

31 Instructional units have conceptual complexity and duration Students learn big ideas of survival, COMMUNITY, conflict Reading topic persists over days and weeks Students write concept maps of pages, chapters, books, unit Themes are substantive-and fun Students become experts on theme

32 Intrinsic motivation (curiosity, self-efficacy, involvement, social) ES = 1.26 Teacher rating of student engagement ES = 1.00 Students amount of reading ES =.49

33 Reading comprehension Standardized tests ES =.91 Multiple text comprehension ES =.93 Reading strategy performances ES =.91 Oral reading fluencyES =.70 Guthrie, et. al. 2007 Educational Psychologist

34 PiantaScience2007 PiantaChild Development2005 Study 1364 students; 827 classrooms; 747 schools; 295 districts; 32 States 80 minutes classroom observation in day At risk –behavior, social, academic Mothers education

35 Emotional support (engagement practices) T. sensitivity to Ss needs, moods, interests Climate of excitement, laughter, warmth Routines are flexible Teacher-centeredness (reversed) Detachment of teacher from Ss (rev.) Negative climate of anger, punishment (rev.) Over-control and rigid regimentation (rev.)

36

37

38 Portrait of engagement Major findings & history Roles in processing and readership Classroom contexts (CORI +) Policy – present and future (?)

39 Cassidy---Whats Hot? Motivation is Not Hothigh agreement Motivation should be Hot---high agreement WHY? Why is fluency hot and engagement cold? 1. both correlate with achievement; 2. both are measurable; 3. neither is same thing as comprehension; 4. teaching fluency does not increase comprehension, 5. but teaching for engagement does increase comprehension.

40 Cassidy---Whats Hot? Engagement is not hot, because… Reading is perceived as cognitive. Cognitive revolution rescued reading from disrepute, in 1970s. Reading is perceived as socio-cultural, which shapes text interaction in dynamic relations, which are inherently situated. Engagement is not policy.

41 Cassidy---Why Should Engagement be Hot? Engagement is a means and an end in schooling. Past educators have been replicators promoting existing literacy, of Bible, or textbook. Future educators will empower students invention of new literacies (internet). Invention demands context of engagementstudents seeking internally to know, share, design.

42 New policies are imminent. Accountability for engagement via Outcomes and Classroom Practices Outcomes of engagement are: fluency in text interaction, competence in reading comprehension, expertise in content, expressive communication.

43 Standards about classroom practices for engagement in reading. Relevance Choice Success Collaboration Themes Research base is young, but enlightening. Implementation depends on you.

44 Education is not The filling of a pail, But the lighting Of a fire


Download ppt "John T. Guthrie University of Maryland. Portrait of engagement Major findings & history Roles in processing Classroom contexts (CORI +) Policy – present."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google