1. THE COMPREHENSION CONUNDRUM ERIC C. POWELL, ED 7201, FALL 2011

2. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.Statement of the Problem 2.Review of Related Literature 3.Statement of Hypothesis 4.Sources

3. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM During my time as a reading and grammar tutor, I have come to notice a disparity between students’ grasp of phonics skills and reading comprehension levels. Students who regularly display a positive grasp of phonics skills are not always able to comprehend and explain what they have just read. Based on these observations I am interested in investigating techniques which purport to increase student comprehension levels.

4. LITERATURE REVIEW Positive gains in reading comprehension: Oral reading techniques (Hinchley & Levy, 1988) Make predictions when reading, generate questions about the text, summarize what was read (Lysynchuk, Pressley, & Vye, 1990) Emphasizing higher-order thinking (Taylor, Pearson, Peterson, & Rodriguez, 2003) Cooperative learning (Uttero, 1988) Exposure to reading strategies before being presented with instruction [5 th graders] (Van Keer & Verhaeghe, 2005)

5. LITERATURE REVIEW (CONT.) Negative gains in reading comprehension: Enriched reading experiences by exposing students to books in their areas of interest, daily supported independent reading of challenging self ‐ selected books using differentiated reading instruction, and interest ‐ based choice opportunities in reading (Reis, McCoach, Coyne, Schreiber, Eckert, & Gubbins, 2007) Exposure to reading strategies before being presented with instruction [2 nd graders] (Van Keer & Verhaeghe, 2005)

6. STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS Exposure to vocabulary as a pre-reading strategy will increase reading comprehension among 5 th graders at PS x.

7. REFERENCE LIST Amendum, S.J., Vernon-Feagans, L., & Ginsberg, M.C. (2011). The effectiveness of a technologically facilitated classroom-based early reading intervention. The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 112, (1), 107-131. August, D., Francis, D.J., Hsu, H.A., & Snow, C.E. (2006). Assessing reading comprehension in bilinguals. The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 107, (2), 221-238. Elish-Piper, L., & L’Allier, S.K. (2011). Examining the relationship between literacy coaching and student reading gains in grades K–3. The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 112, (1), 83-106. Gersten, R., Fuchs, L.S., Williams, J.P. & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: a review of research. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 71, (2), 279-320.

8. REFERENCE LIST (CONT.) Hinchley, J., & Levy, B.A. (1988). Developmental and individual differences in reading comprehension. Cognition and Instruction, Vol. 5, (1), 3-47. Lysynchuk, L.M., Pressley, M., & Vye, N.J. (1990). Reciprocal teaching improves standardized reading-comprehension performance in poor comprehenders. The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 90, (5), 469-484. Reis, S.M., McCoach, D.B., Coyne, M., Schreiber, F.J., Eckert, R.D., & Gubbins, E.J. (2007). Using planned enrichment strategies with direct instruction to improve reading fluency, comprehension, and attitude toward reading: an evidence ‐ based study. The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 108, (1), 3-23.

9. REFERENCE LIST (CONT.) Taylor, B.M., Pearson, P.D., Peterson, D.S., & Rodriguez, M.C. (2003). Reading growth in high-poverty classrooms: the influence of teacher practices that encourage cognitive engagement in literacy learning. The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 104, (1), 3-28. Uttero, D.A. (1988). Activating comprehension through cooperative learning. The Reading Teacher, Vol. 41, (4), 390-395. Van Keer, H., & Verhaeghe, J.P. (2005). Effects of explicit reading strategies instruction and peer tutoring on second and fifth graders' reading comprehension and self-efficacy perceptions. The Journal of Experimental Education, Vol. 73, (4), 291-329.