+
It’s Greek to Me! Demystifying Reading Comprehension for Struggling Readers Nevada Department of Education’s Inaugural Summer Institute Abbie Olszewski, Ph.D., CCC-SLP June 15th, 2016 2:10pm to 3:15pm + Disclosures
Financial
n None
Non-Financial n Assistant Professor at University of Nevada, Reno n Director of Language and Literacy Development Center at UNR n Member of American Speech-Language Hearing Association n Member of Nevada Speech-Language Hearing Association + Objectives
1. Describe different profiles of students who struggle with reading comprehension.
2. Describe different reasons why students struggle with reading comprehension.
3. Describe the types of reading comprehension questions to ask and how to teach your students how to find the answers. + Why Reading Comprehension? + National Reading Panel (2000) Five Pillars of Effective Reading Instruction
2. Phonics (Decoding)
3. Fluency
4. Vocabulary
5. Comprehension + National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP, 2015)
Reading
4th Grade 8th Grade 12th Grade 36% 34% 37% At or above Proficient level +Different profiles of students who struggle with reading comprehension + Buly and Valencia (2002)
n Examined 108 4th grade students who scored below Proficient level on the reading section of the Washington State Test.
n Administered additional tests: n Phonemic awareness n Word attack n Word reading accuracy n Reading rate n Reading expression n Vocabulary knowledge n Answer comprehension questions orally + Buly and Valencia (2002) and Valencia & Buly (2004)
6 Profiles Percentage 1. Auotmatic Word Callers 18% 2. Struggling Word Callers 15% 3. Word Stumblers 18% 4. Slow and Steady Comprehenders 24% 5. Slow Word Callers 17% 6. Disabled Readers 9% + Valencia & Buly (2004) Profiles
Profile % Word Meaning Fluency Identification
1. Auotmatic Word ++ - ++ Callers 18%
2. Struggling Word - - ++ Callers 15% 3. Word Stumblers 18% - + - 4. Slow + ++ - Comprehenders 24% 5. Slow Word Callers 17% + - - 6. Disabled Readers 9% ------+ 1. Automatic Word Callers
n 18%
n Strength in word identification
n Weakness in reading for meaning
n Strong oral reading fluency rate
Profile % Word Meaning Fluency Identification 1. Auotmatic Word 18% ++ - ++ Callers
2. Struggling Word 15% - - ++ Callers
3. Word Stumblers 18% - + -
4. Slow 24% + ++ - Comprehenders 5. Slow Word Callers 17% + - -
6. Disabled Readers 9% ------+ 2. Struggling Word Callers
n 18%
n Struggle with word identification
n Struggle with meaning
n Slower oral reading fluency rate
Profile % Word Meaning Fluency Identification 1. Auotmatic Word 18% ++ - ++ Callers
2. Struggling Word 15% - - ++ Callers
3. Word Stumblers 18% - + -
4. Slow 24% + ++ - Comprehenders 5. Slow Word Callers 17% + - -
6. Disabled Readers 9% ------+ 3. Word Stumblers
n 18%
n Struggle with word identification
n Relatively good meaning
n Slow oral reading fluency rate
Profile % Word Meaning Fluency Identification 1. Auotmatic Word 18% ++ - ++ Callers
2. Struggling Word 15% - - ++ Callers
3. Word Stumblers 18% - + -
4. Slow 24% + ++ - Comprehenders 5. Slow Word Callers 17% + - -
6. Disabled Readers 9% ------+ 4. Slow and Steady Comprehenders n 24%
n Relatively strong word identification
n Relatively strong understanding in meaning
n Slow reading rate Profile % Word Meaning Fluency Identification 1. Auotmatic Word 18% ++ - ++ Callers
2. Struggling Word 15% - - ++ Callers
3. Word Stumblers 18% - + -
4. Slow 24% + ++ - Comprehenders 5. Slow Word Callers 17% + - -
6. Disabled Readers 9% ------+ 5. Slow Word Callers
n 17%
n Decode words quickly
n Fail to read for meaning
n Slow oral reading fluency rate
Profile % Word Meaning Fluency Identification 1. Auotmatic Word 18% ++ - ++ Callers
2. Struggling Word 15% - - ++ Callers
3. Word Stumblers 18% - + -
4. Slow 24% + ++ - Comprehenders 5. Slow Word Callers 17% + - -
6. Disabled Readers 9% ------+ 6. Disabled Readers
n 9%
n Difficulty with word identification
n Difficulty with meaning
n Difficulty with oral reading fluency rate
Profile % Word Meaning Fluency Identification 1. Auotmatic Word 18% ++ - ++ Callers
2. Struggling Word 15% - - ++ Callers
3. Word Stumblers 18% - + -
4. Slow 24% + ++ - Comprehenders 5. Slow Word Callers 17% + - -
6. Disabled Readers 9% ------+Different reasons why students struggle with reading comprehension + Reading Comprehension
“There is no single explanation for substantial difficulties with reading comprehension.”
Duke, N., Cartwright, K., & Hidden, K. (2014). In A. Stone, E. Silliman, B., Ehren, & G. Wallch (Eds.). Handbook of Language & Literacy, Development and Disorders, 2nd Edition. New York, New York: The Guilford Press.
+ Why do children struggle with reading? n Difficulties with executive n Difficulties with oral language? skills?
n Is the student and English n Difficulties with prior word language learner? knowledge?
n Does the student speak African American English? n Difficulties with active thinking? n Difficulties with word recognition and decoding? n Difficulties with specific texts? n Difficulties with fluency
n Difficulties with motivation?
Duke, N., Cartwright, K., & Hidden, K. (2014). In A. Stone, E. Silliman, B., Ehren, & G. Wallch (Eds.). n Difficulties with home and Handbook of Language & Literacy, Development and Disorders, 2nd Edition. New York, New York: The Guilford Press. school? + Difficulties with oral language?
n Difficulty with oral language in preschool years predicts later reading difficulties in elementary school (Rescorla, 2005).
n Vocabulary knowledge and vocabulary-related abilities are closely related to reading comprehension (Vellutino, Tunmer, Jaccard, & Chen, 2007).
n All aspects of language functioning including morphology, syntax, semantics, discourse skills, and metalinguistic skills are associated with difficulties in reading comprehension (Kamhi & Catts, 2002; Menyuk & Chesnick, 1997; Roth, speech, Cooper, & De La Paz, 1996). + Is the student and English language learner?
n Difficulties with pronunciation cause teachers to underestimate a non-native speaker’s comprehension (Moll & Diaz, 1985).
n More likely to be of low socioeconomic status and receive lower quality instruction (Au, 2002). + Does the student speak African American English?
n Socioeconomic status and socioeconomic associated instructional factors may play a role.
n African American students use African American English, which varies from Standard American English in phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics (Washington, Terry, & Seidenberg, 2014). + Difficulties with word recognition and decoding
n Students who have difficulty with reading comprehension may have difficulty with word recognition and decoding (Buly & Valencia, 2002). + Difficulties with oral reading fluency
n Difficulty reading words quickly and accurately and with proper expression (Buly & Valencia, 2002).
n Fluency does not guarantee comprehension. + Difficulties with executive skills?
n Students may have difficulty with executive skills, which are mental process that manage and direct thinking. n Working memory n Inhibition n Planning n Cognitive flexibility + Difficulties with prior word knowledge?
n Students may lack prior knowledge or how to apply prior knowledge (Wallach, Chartlon, & Bartholomew, 2014). + Difficulties with active thinking?
n Students who have difficulty with active thinking struggle with making predictions, rereading, attending to text structure, asking themselves questions as they read, visualizing, and summarizing (Wallach, Charlton, & Bartholomew, 2014). + Difficulties with specific texts?
n Different comprehension processes are used for different types of text structures (Duke & Roberts, 2010).
n Different texts have different purposes, language, and graphical features. + Difficulties with motivation?
n Often, students who have difficulty with reading comprehension are have lower motivation to read (Logan, Medford, & Hughes, 2011). + Difficulties with home and school?
n Teachers can impact a students reading comprehension ability (Duke, Pearson, Strachan, & Billman, 2011).
n Increased reading frequency at home in kindergarten has improved reading comprehension in 4th grade (Sénéchal, 2006). + Reading comprehension questions + Question Answer Relationship (QAR) In the book In My Head Right There Author & Me The answers are in the book. The answer is not in the text. These are basic recall Students must think about what questions and the answer is in they learned from the text and on place. what they know. Think & Search On My Own These answers can be found in The answer is not in the text. the text, often across multiple Students must rely solely on pages. They involve higher their own interpretation level thinking like comparing/ experience. contrasting, drawing inferences, describing mood.
(Raphael, 1986) + QAR Question Stems Right There
n What did… n Define…
n Who did.. n What does..mean n What kind… n How many… n Where is … n What was… n Who is… n Who are… n How.. n When did.. n Name … n What does… n List.. + QAR Question Stems Think and Search
n List… n What causes/caused…
n Describe… n Tell me in your own words… n What happened first, second, or third? n Summarize….
n What happened before/ n What are the characteristics after? of…
n What examples.. n Characters, setting, problem, events, resolution n How many times.. n Compare/contrast.. n What are some… + QAR Question Stems Author & Me n What can you infer about n What does the author mean.. ‘s feelings in this section of the text? n Do you think the author makes a strong argument? n What do you predict will happen next? Why do you n Tell me the most important think so? reason…
n What are the themes, main n Tell me the biggest ideas, or mood/tone of the problem…. text? n Why/How do you think… n What is the author’s message/ point of view? n What if…
n The seeing is never stated, but n How/when do you think the where you think the story is relationship in the story taking place? changes? + QAR Question Stems On My Own
n Have you ever.. n How do you feel about… n If you could… n Do you think.. n If you were going to… n How would you.. n In your opinion… n Which is better… n Do you agree with… Why? n In what ways have you… n Do you know anyone else who… + Steps to teaching QAR
1. Step 1: Introduce different types of questions using QAR method.
2. Step 2: Describe how to use and identify QAR.
3. Step 3: Model QAR with shorter texts and increase to longer texts.
4. Step 4. Involve the students in QAR. + Steps to teaching QAR Step 1: Introduce questions
n Right There n Author & Me
n Think and Search n On My Own + Steps to teaching QAR Step 2: Describe how to use and identify QAR
n Explain how to identify questions n Look for key words n Use stem sheet + Steps to teaching QAR Step 3: Model QAR with shorter texts and increase to longer texts
n Read text
n Ask question
n Think outloud while identifying the stem. If unsure, model “in the book” questions
n Use shorter texts, ask questions, model answers
n Use longer texts, ask questions, model answers + Steps to teaching QAR Step 4. Involve the students in QAR
n Use shorter texts, ask students questions, scaffold how to answers
n Use longer texts, ask students questions, scaffold how to answers + Creating QAR Questions from Books + Writing QAR In the book In My Head Right There Author & Me
Think & Search On My Own . + Writing QAR In the book In My Head Right There Author & Me
Think & Search On My Own . + Writing QAR In the book In My Head Right There Author & Me
Think & Search On My Own . + Writing QAR In the book In My Head Right There Author & Me
Think & Search On My Own . + Questions and Answers
?????? + Thank You!
n Abbie Olszewski, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
n Assistant Professor, Dept. of Speech Pathology and Audiology
n University of Nevada, Reno
n [email protected] + References
n Au, K. (2002). Multicultural factors and the effective instruction of students of diverse backgrounds. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 392-413). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
n Buly, M. & Valencia, S. (2002). Below the bar: Profiles of students who fail state reading assessments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 219-239.
n Duke, N., Cartwright, K., & Hidden, K. (2014). In A. Stone, E. Silliman, B., Ehren, & G. Wallch (Eds.). Handbook of Language & Literacy, Development and Disorders, 2nd Edition. New York, New York: The Guilford Press.
n Duke, N., Pearson, P., Strachan, S., & Billman, A. (2011). Essential elements of fostering and teaching reading comprehension. In S.J. Samuels & A.E. Farstrup (eds.), What research as to say about reading instruction (4th ed., pp., 51-93). Newark, DE: International Reading Association
n Duke, N. & Roberts, K. (2010). The genre-specific nature of reading comprehension. In D. Wyse, R. Andres, & J. Hoffman (Eds.), The Routeledge international handbook of English, language and literacy teaching (pp. 74-86). London, Routeledge. + References
n Kamhi, A. & Catts, H. (2002). The language basis of reading: Implications for classification and treatment of children with reading disabilities. In K.G. Butler & E.R. Silliman (Eds.), Speaking, reading and writing in children with language learning disabilities in research and practice (pp. 45-72). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
n Logan, S. , Medford, M., & Hughes, N. (2011). The importance of intrinsic motivation for high and low ability readers’ reading comprehension performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 124-128.
n Menyuk, P. & Chesnick, M. (1997). Metalinguistic skills, oral language knowledge, and reading. Topics in Language Disorders, 17, 75-87.
n Moll, L. & Diaz, S. (1985). Ethnographic pedagogy: Promoting effective bilingual instruction. In E. Garcia & R.V. Padilla (Eds.), Advances in bilingual education research (pp. 127-149), Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
n National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2015). The Nation’s Report Card Nine subjects, three grades, one report card. Retrieved from http://www.nationsreportcard.gov/
n National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidenced-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Retrieved from https://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/ report.pdf#search=national reading panel 2000
n Raphael, T. (1986). Teaching question answer relationship, revisited. The Reading Teacher, 39(6), 516-522. + References
n Rescorla, L. (2005). Age 13 language and reading outcomes in late- talking toddlers. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48-459-472.
n Roth, F., Speech, D., Cooper, D., & De La Paz, S. (1996). Unresolved mysteries: How do metalinguistics and narrative skills connect with early reading? Journal of Special Education, 30, 257-277.
n Sénéchal, M. (2006). Testing the home literacy model: Parental involvement in kindergarten is differentially related to grade 4 reading comprehension, fluency, spelling, and reading for pleasure. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 59-87.
n Taylor, B. (2010). Catching Readers Day-By-Day Small-Group Reading Interventions, Grade 2. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
n Valencia, S. & Buly, M. (2004). Behind test scores: What struggling readings really need. The Reading Teacher, 57(6),520- 531. + References
n Vellutino F, Tunmer W, Jaccard J, Chen R. Components of reading ability: Multivariate evidence for a convergent skills model of reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading. 2007;11(1): 3–32
n Wallach, G., Charlton, S., & Bartholomew, C. (2014). The spoken- written comprehension connection: Construction intervention strategies. In A. Stone, E. Silliman, B., Ehren, & G. Wallch (Eds.), Handbook of language & literacy, development and disorders, 2nd Edition (pp. 485-504). New York, New York: The Guilford Press.
n Washington, J., Terry, N., & Seidenberg, M. (2014). Language variation and literacy learning: The case of African American English. In IA. Stone, E. Silliman, B., Ehren, & G. Wallch (Eds.), Handbook of language & literacy, development and disorders, 2nd Edition (pp. 204-222). New York, New York: The Guilford Press. + References
n http://www.davis.k12.ut.us/cms/lib09/UT01001306/ Centricity/Domain/32/QAR%20Question%20Stems.pdf
n http://www.nbss.ie/sites/default/files/publications/ qar_strategy_handout.pdf
n http://www.readwritethink.org/files/resources/ lesson_images/lesson980/qar.pdf