Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

MODULE 4– COMPREHENSION ENGAGING STUDENTS IN EXTENDED TEXT DISCUSSION Welcome back, NGCARPD Cohort 2 Please sign in.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "MODULE 4– COMPREHENSION ENGAGING STUDENTS IN EXTENDED TEXT DISCUSSION Welcome back, NGCARPD Cohort 2 Please sign in."— Presentation transcript:

1 MODULE 4– COMPREHENSION ENGAGING STUDENTS IN EXTENDED TEXT DISCUSSION Welcome back, NGCARPD Cohort 2 Please sign in.

2 TODAYS AGENDA This morning: -SSS and Common Core Correlation --Engaging Students in Extended Discussion of Text This afternoon: -Review of CIS Model -Discussion/Sharing of Your Lessons -Overview and Requirements of Practicum 2

3 TEACHING READING COMPREHENSION THE RESEARCH EXTENDED TEXT DISCUSSION TEXT INSTRUCTIONAL TOOLS THE READER THE INTERACTIVE PROCESS

4 TEACHING READING COMPREHENSION THE RESEARCH

5 TEACHING READING COMPREHENSION EFFECTIVE PRACTICES FOR TEACHING STUDENTS TO THINK AND UNDERSTAND TEXT From Stu Greenberg, Executive Director Just Read, Florida! and the Office of Early Learning

6 What should comprehension instruction be instruction of? - Mike Pressley 1.Teach decoding skills 2.Encourage the development of sight words 3.Teach students to use semantic context cues to evaluate whether decodings are accurate 4.Teach vocabulary meanings 5.Encourage extensive reading 6.Teach self-regulated use of comprehension strategies Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M.L. Kamil, P.B.Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (vol. III, pp. 545–561).Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

7 RECENT BRAIN RESEARCH FINDINGS IN READING

8 TEACHING READING & THE BRAIN

9 5 Year Olds Before Learning To Read Right Left

10 After Intervention Left Right normalized Good Intervention: Normalizes Brain Activation Patterns Before Intervention

11 First-Grade Seventh-Grade

12 12 An fMRI Study of Strategic Reading Comprehension While there have been neuroimaging studies of text comprehension, little is known about the brain mechanisms underlying strategic learning from text. Up until recently these studies have not examined the differences in brain activity associated with different reading strategies.

13 13

14 HOW ARE THE READING STRATEGIES USEFUL? Comprehension Monitoring: Being aware of how well you understand what you are reading. Paraphrasing: Stating the sentences in your own words. Prediction: Predicting what will come next in the text. Elaboration: Linking information in the sentence to information you already know. Bridging: Linking different parts of a text together. 14

15 TEACHERS MUST TEACH STUDENTS HOW TO: Make predictions based on background knowledge. Identify key ideas from text they are reading. Be aware of text structures. Monitor their comprehension and know how to employ fix-up strategies. Have a knowledge of and use a variety of reading strategies effectively. Paraphrase, explain and summarize information and construct conclusions. 15

16 DIRECT TEACHING Research shows that reading comprehension can be improved through direct instruction in cognitive strategies (or ways of thinking about the ideas in text) Our focus will be teaching students how to think during reading. 16

17 TEACHING STUDENTS TO THINK AS THEY READ StrategyPurposeBrain Function Teacher Sets a Purpose and Reads Aloud for at least 10 minutes per day from text Get a sense of what the text is about Link new information to background knowledge Students read a range of text daily from 300-1500 words individually or collaboratively Relate what is already known to what is being read Hook new information to what is already known. Manage short term memory with long term memory Directed Note Taking Constantly monitor, think and react to the text as it is being read Brain needs to understand information to accept it, stay clearly focused to help commit information to memory Adapted from Irene Gaskins 17

18 TEACHING STUDENTS TO THINK AS THEY READ StrategyPurposeHelps the Brain Question Generation To check own understanding or clarify what is not understood Must understand information for it to be committed to memory Teacher teaches from written cognitively complex question To check own understanding or clarify what is not understood Must understand information for it to be committed to memory. Working memory can only hold limited ideas at one time Adapted from Irene Gaskins 18

19 Time spent reading is highly correlated with comprehension. Effective instruction using high-quality curriculum materials can increase students comprehension. WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYS ABOUT COMPREHENSION 19

20 TEACHING READING IS URGENT A student at the 10 th percentile reads about 60,000 words a year in 5 th grade A student at the 50 th percentile reads about 900,000 words a year in 5 th grade Average students receive about 15 times as much practice in a year (Anderson, R. C., 1992) 20

21 Developing questions aligned to the FCAT Item Specifications and your school curriculum map Interactive Text Instruction Extended discussion based on text reading Extended writing to support comprehension Systematically engage in strategic scaffolding of student learning from text reading 21

22 DIRECT TEACHING 22 Provide thorough text support (fluency, vocabulary, writing/talking) Teach comprehension strategies (actively teach students to think as they read – active cooperative thinking activities) Encourage sense making (focus on meaning)

23 CONTINUUM OF STRATEGIES TO DEEPEN INSTRUCTION AND ASSIST STUDENTS IN GAINING MEANING FROM TEXT 23

24 DURING TEACHING SEQUENCE TO BUILD COMPREHENSION Activate prior knowledge with a hook Make visible the destination for thinking by presenting the units overarching complex question and reviewing the language of the question Model for students how to read and interact with the text using a reflective writing tool Provide multiple opportunities to read and teach students how to understand text Provide opportunity to read and interact with the text alone with feedback from the teacher Questioning Monitoring

25 Teaching To Develop Deep Text Understanding Process-OrientedAsking Questions TestingGrading Evaluating Guided Practice with Feedback Student Use with Feedback Modeling (Adapted by Dr. Lois Huffman from Richardson & Morgan, 2000) TEACHING COMPREHENSION VERSUS TESTING COMPREHENSION Determining Reading Comprehension vs 25

26 SOURCES Anderson, R.C., Wilson, P.T., & Fielding, L.G. 1988. Growth in reading and how children spend their time outside of school. Reading Research Quarterly 23 (3), p. 292. Armbruster, B., Lehr, F; Osborne. J. 2001. Putting reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read, kindergarten through grade 3. National Inst. for Literacy, Washington, DC.; National Inst. of Child Health and Human Development (NIH), Bethesda, MD.; Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC.; Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement, Ann Arbor, MI. Beck, I., & McKeown, M. 2001. Text talk: Capturing the benefits of read-aloud experiences for young children. Reading Teacher, 55:1. Baumann, J. & Kameenui, E. 2004. Vocabulary Instruction. Research to Practice. New York: Guilford Press 26

27 SOURCES Baumann, J. & Kameenui, E. 2004. Vocabulary Instruction. New York: Guilford Press Beck, I., McKeown, M., & Kucan, L. 2002. Bringing Words to Life. New York: Guilford Press. Biemiller, Andrew. 1999. Language and reading success. Newton Upper Falls, Massachusetts: Brookline Books. Carlisle, Joanne & Rice, Melinda. 2002. Improving reading comprehension: Research-based principles and practices Felton, R., & Lillie, D. (2002). Teaching Students with Persistent Reading Problems (a multi-media CD-ROM). Greensboro, NC: Guilford County Schools. Fielding, L., & Peason, D. 1994. Reading comprehension: What works. Educational Leadership, 51:5, pp. 62-68. Florida Center for Reading Research – fcrr.org. Researchers presentations link. 27

28 SOURCES Gaskins, Irene. et al. 2002. Helping struggling readers make sense of reading in Block, C., Gambrell, L., & Pressley, M. Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association Gunning, Thomas. 1998. Assessing and Correcting Reading and Writing Difficulties. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Hart,B. & Risley, T. 1995. Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children. Baltimore: Brookes Publishing. Maria, Katherine. 1990. Reading comprehension instruction: Issues and strategies. Parkton, Maryland: York Press. Morris, Darrell. 1999. The Howard Street tutoring manual: Teaching at-risk readers in the primary grades. New York: Guilford Press. 28

29 SOURCES National Reading Panel. 2000. Report of the National Reading Panel:Teaching children to read – Reports of the subgroups. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH Pub. No. 00-4764. Oczkus, L. 2003. Reciprocal Teaching at Work. Delaware: International Reading Association. Palinscar, A. & Brown. A. 1986. Interactive teaching to promote learning from text. Reading Teacher 39, April, pp.771-777. Pearson, D., & Gallagher, M. 1983. The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8:3, pp. 317-344. 29

30 SOURCES Reutzel, D., Camperell, K., & Smith, J. 2002. Hitting the wall: Helping struggling readers comprehend in Block, C., Gambrell, L., & Pressley, M. Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association. Smith, Margaret. 1999. Teaching comprehension from a multisensory perspective in Birsh, Judith, Ed. Multisensory Teaching of Basic Language Skills. Baltimore: Brooks. Stahl, K. Proof, Practice, and promise: Comprehension strategy instruction in the primary grades. The Reading Teacher Vol.57. No.7, April 2004 Stahl,S. & Nagy, William. Teaching Word Meanings. Lawrence Ehrlbaum Assoc., 2006. 30

31 SOURCES Stahl, K. and McKenna, M. Reading Research at Work. New York: Guilford Press. 2006 Spires, H., & Stone, P. The directed note taking activity: A self- questioning approach. Journal of Reading, 33:1, pp. 36-39. Sweet, A., & Snow, C. 2002. Reconceptualizing reading comprehension in Block, C., Gambrell, L., & Pressley, M. Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association. Hiebert E. and Kamil, M. 2006 Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Lawrence Ehrlbaum Assoc. Block & Pressley. 2002 Comprehension Instruction. Guilford Press. 31

32 MODULE 3: COMPREHENSION EXTENDED TEXT DISCUSSION

33 ENGAGING STUDENTS IN EXTENDED DISCUSSION KEY QUESTIONS 33 How do you engage ALL students in discussions about text? How do you ensure that the level of discussion pushes students to higher levels of understanding? Is there a particular questioning hierarchy/model that works for you? Do you use whole-group, small-group, or a combination of both to engage students in textual discussions?

34 WHY STICK TO BLOOMS WHEN THE WHOLE WORLD IS MOVING TO WEBBS? BLOOMS IS LOGICAL. LETS TAKE A LOOK. 34

35 35 Blooms Taxonomy

36 BLOOMS TAXONOMY Knowledge – You must KNOW key vocabulary, concepts, ideas, people, etc., in order to understand the ideas presented in a text. Comprehension – You must UNDERSTAND the basic ideas and literal meaning of the text before you can interpret the authors objectives, the hidden meanings, etc. Application – You must be able to apply the ideas to your own world and experience to have a frame of reference for the text. Analysis – You cannot understand the authors purpose or the main idea unless you first take the text apart and study it. Have you ever distributed a text to students and the first response was, I dont get this. (Thats because knowledge through analysis has yet to occur.) Synthesis – Once you have taken the text apart, you are in a better position to pull all the ideas together to determine the main idea or authors purpose. Evaluation – You must study all aspects of a document before you can intelligently make judgments about the authors message. 36

37 SIMPLIFYING BLOOMS FOR USE IN DISCUSSIONS Teach and practice Blooms with students in your classroom. Simplify Blooms for use in the classroom. Encourage students to ask three kinds of questions about text: (1) Questions about things you dont know or dont understand. (Knowledge and Comprehension) (2) Questions that encourage deeper understanding of the text (Application, Analysis, Synthesis) (3) Questions that provoke personal interest or that reflect your own curiosity (Application, Evaluation) 37

38 DEVELOPING QUESTIONS FOR EXTENDED DISCUSSIONS What do you do to ensure that the level of questioning that occurs in your classroom requires higher level thinking of your students? Consider the questions you ask, as well as questions asked by your students. Discuss at your table and be prepared to share. 38

39 EXTENDED TEXT DISCUSSION ACTIVITY GRETCHEN BERTRAM, DEERLAKE MIDDLE SCHOOL 39

40 PRACTICUM REVIEW 40

41 NEXT MEETING: FEBRUARY 15, 2012 CHILES HIGH SCHOOL 41


Download ppt "MODULE 4– COMPREHENSION ENGAGING STUDENTS IN EXTENDED TEXT DISCUSSION Welcome back, NGCARPD Cohort 2 Please sign in."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google