Using Anticipatory Reading Guides to Improve Elementary Students’ Comprehension

Abstract

students with comprehension strategies that transfer to all content areas. With stable levels of reading achievement over the last two decades in the United States, it is necessary that further research be conducted on methods of increasing students’ comprehension proficiencies. This experimental research study explores the use of an anticipatory reading guide with third grade struggling readers across multiple subject areas. Findings indicate that the experimental treatment group outperformed the control group by a statistically significant rate on both reading and content area measures, indicating that when struggling readers practice and use strategies to explicitly think what will be asked of them after reading the passage they perform at higher levels

Keywords

• -

Using Anticipatory Reading Guides to Improve Elementary Students’ Comprehension

Abstract

-

Keywords

• -

References

1. Afflerbach et al. (2008). Clarifying Differences Between Reading Skills and Reading
2. Strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61(5): 364-373. Anderson, J. R. (2000). Learning and Memory: An Integrated Approach. New York: Wiley.
3. Barry, A. L. (2002). Reading Strategies Teachers Say They Use. Journal of Adolescent
4. & Adult Literacy, 46(2): 132-141. Baum, W. M. (1994). Understanding Behaviorism: Science, Behavior, and Culture.
5. New York: HarperCollins College Publishers. Cantrell et al. (2010). The Impact of a Strategy-Based Intervention on the Comprehension and Strategy Use of Struggling Adolescent Readers. Journal of
6. Educational Psychology, 102(2): 257-280. Carlisle et al. (2010). Reading Achievement in Reading First Schools in Michigan.
7. Journal of Literacy Research, 42(1): 49-70. doi:10.1080/10862960903583236
8. Cassidy, J. & Ortlieb, E. (in press). What was Hot (and Not) in Literacy: What We Can Learn. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(1). Cassidy, J. & Ortlieb, E. (2012). Looking at Literacy in the 21st Century. The Clearing House, 85(4): 141-145.

9. Cassidy, J. & Ortlieb, E. (2011). Literacy – The First Decade of the New Millennium.
10. Reading Horizons, 51(2): 93-102. Cheek, E. H. & Cheek, M.C. (1983). Reading Instruction through Content Teaching.
11. Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company. Dole et al. (1991). Moving from the Old to the New: Research in Reading
12. Comprehension Instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61(2): 239-264. Duffelmeyer, F. (1994). Effective Anticipation Guide Statements for Learning from
13. Expository Prose. Journal of Reading, 37: 452-455. Durkin, D. (1978/1979). What Classroom Observations Reveal about Reading
14. Comprehension Instruction Practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 14(4): 481-533. Durkin, D. (1981). Reading Comprehension Instruction in Five Basal Reader Series.
15. Reading Research Quarterly, 16: 515-544. Fitts, P. M. & Peterson, J. R. (1964). Information Capacity of Discrete Motor
16. Responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(2): 103–112. Frankel et al. (2013). Embracing Complexity: Integrating Reading, Writing, and Learning in Intervention Settings. In E. Ortlieb & E. H. Cheek, Jr. (Eds.), School-Based
17. Interventions for Struggling Readers, K-8 (pp. 3-20). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Gagne, R. M. & Briggs, L. J. (1974). Principles of Instruction Design. Oxford,
18. England: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Goodin et al. (2009). Comprehension: The Means, Motive, and Opportunity for
19. Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners. In L. M. Morrow, R. Rueda, & D. Lapp (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Literacy and Diversity (pp. 337-365), New York: The Guilford Press. Head, M. H. & Readence, J. E. (1992). Anticipation Guides: Using Prediction to
20. Promote Learning from Text. In E. K. Dishner, T. W. Bean, J. E. Readence, & D. W. Moore (Eds.), Reading in the Content Areas: Improving Classroom Instruction (3rd ed., pp. 227-233). Iowa: Kendall/Hunt. Henry, L. A. (2006). Searching for an Answer: The Critical Role of New Literacies while Reading on the Internet. The Reading Teacher, 59(7): 614-627.
21. Hock, M. & Mellard, D. (2005). Reading Comprehension Strategies for Adult Literacy Outcomes. doi:1598/JAAL.49.3.
22. Hunter, M. (1994). Mastery Teaching. California: Corwin Press.
23. Kamps, D. M. & Greenwood, C. R. (2005). Formulating Secondary-Level Reading
24. Interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(6): 500-509. Kontovourki, S. & Campis, C. (2010). Meaningful Practice: Test Prep in a Third-Grade
25. Public School Classroom. The doi:1598/RT.64.4.2 Reading Teacher, 64(4): 236-245.
26. Leu et al. (2004).Toward a Theory of New Literacies Emerging from the Internet and Other Communication Technologies. In R. Ruddell & N. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical
27. Models and Processes of Reading (5th ed., pp.1570-1613). Delaware: International Reading Association.
28. Marinak, B. & Gambrell, L. (2013). Meet Them Where They Are: Engaging Instruction for Struggling Readers. In E. Ortlieb & E. H. Cheek, Jr. (Eds.), School-Based
29. Interventions for Struggling Readers, K-8 (pp. 41-60). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Martin, P. & Pappas, P. (2006). Strategies for Struggling Readers. Retrieved from http://www.peterpappas.com/blogs/read-blog/non-reader-complete.pdf.
30. Mokhtari et al. (2009). How One Elementary School Uses Data to Help Raise Students'
31. Reading Achievement. The Reading Teacher, 63(4): 334-337. Molfese et al. (2006). Below-Average, Average, and Above-Average Readers Engage
32. Different and Similar Brain Regions while Reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(4): 352-363. National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2002). The Nation’s Report Card:
33. Reading 2002. Retrieved from nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2002/2003521.pdf
34. National Center for Education Statistics. (2004). Executive Summary of Adult Literacy in America: A First Look at the Results of the National Adult Literacy Survey.
35. Retrieved August 31, 2012, from http://nces.ed.gov/naal/resources/execsumm.asp#litskills
36. National Center for Education Statistics. (2005). The Nation’s Report Card: 2005
37. Assessment Results. Retrieved July 9, 2012, from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nrc/ reading_math_2005/
38. National Institute for Literacy. (2001). Put Reading First: The Research Building
39. Blocks for Teaching Children to Read, Kindergarten through Grade 3. Maryland: ED Pubs. Neuman, S. & Gambrell, L. (2013). Quality Reading Instruction in the Age of Common
40. Core Standards. Delaware: International Reading Association. New London Group. (1996). A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures.
41. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1): 60-91. Ortlieb, et al. (in press). Evaluating the Efficacy of Using a Digital Reading Environment to Improve Reading Comprehension within a Reading Clinic. Reading Psychology. Ortlieb, E. (2013). Struggling to Read: Not Just an Urban Problem. Journal of
42. Sociological Research, 4(1): 195-206. doi: 10.5296/jsr.v4i1.2046
43. Ortlieb, E. (2013). Effects of an Anticipatory Reading Guide on Third Grade Struggling
44. Readers’ Comprehension. Journal of Contemporary Research in Education, 1(2): 63- Ortlieb, E. (2012). The Effects of Using Greek and Latin Word Parts in the Second
45. Grade within a Struggling School District. The Reading Professor, 34(1): 29-32. Ortlieb, E. (2012). Examining the Utility of High Stakes Assessment. In J. Cassidy & S.
46. Grote-Garcia (Eds.), What's Hot in Literacy: Trends and Issues (pp. 29-33). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. Ortlieb, E. (2012). The Past, Present, and Future of Reading Diagnosis and Remediation. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(3): 395-400.
47. Ortlieb, E. & Cheek, Jr., E. H. (Eds.) (2013). Literacy Research, Practice, and Evaluation: Vol. 3. School-Based Interventions for Struggling Readers, K-8. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
48. Ortlieb, E. & Cheek, Jr., E. H. (Eds.) (2013). Literacy Research, Practice, and Evaluation: Vol. 2. Advanced Literacy Practices: From the Clinic to the Classroom.
49. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Ortlieb, E. & Cheek, Jr., E. H. (Eds.) (2012). Literacy Research, Practice, and Evaluation: Vol. 1. Using Informative Assessments for Effective Literacy Instruction.
50. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Ortlieb, et al. (2013). Fostering Proactive Reading Instruction within the Content Areas.
51. In E. Ortlieb & E. H. Cheek, Jr. (Eds.), Literacy Research, Practice, and Evaluation: Vol. School-Based Interventions for Struggling Readers, K-8 (pp. 21-40). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Ortlieb, et al. (2013). Vocabulary/Comprehension-Based Models of Reading Clinics. In
52. E. Ortlieb & E.H. Cheek, Jr. (Eds.), Literacy Research, Practice, and Evaluation: Vol. Advanced Literacy Practices: From the Clinic to the Classroom (pp. 117-136). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Ortlieb, E., Grandstaff-Beckers, G., & Cheek, Jr., E. (2012). Fostering Reading
53. Excellence at Every Level of School through Reading Clinics. The Clearing House, 85(1), 1-6. doi: 10.1080/00098655.2011.601356
54. Ortlieb, E. & Marinak, B. A. (2013). Surveying Digital Literacy Use and Motivation in
55. Elementary School Students. Basic Research Journal of Education Research and Review, 2(5), 81-88. Ortlieb, E., & Norris, M. R. (2012). Using the Think-Aloud Strategy to Bolster Reading
56. Comprehension of Science Concepts. Current Issues in Education, 15(1): 1-9. Retrieved from http://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/890 Payne, R. K. (2009). Academic Strategies. In D. Shenk & J. Conrad (Eds.), Research
57. Based Strategies (pp. 64-71). Texas: aha Process, Inc. Pearson, P. D. & Dole, J. A. (1987). Explicit Comprehension Instruction: A Review of
58. Research and a New Conceptualization of Instruction. Elementary School Journal, 88(2): 151-165. Pearson, P. D. & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The Instruction of Reading Comprehension.
59. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8: 317-344. Pearson, P. D. & Fielding, L. (1991). Comprehension Instruction. In Barr et al. (Eds.),
60. Handbook of Reading Research: Volume II (pp. 815-860). New York: Longman. Pressley et al. (2006). The State of Educational Intervention Research as Viewed through the Lens of Literacy Intervention. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 19: 1–19.
61. Quirk et al. (1975). The Classroom Behavior of Teachers during Compensatory
62. Reading Instruction. Journal of Educational Research, 68(5): 185-192. Raphael, T. E. & Au, K. H. (2005). QAR: Enhancing Comprehension and Test Taking across Grades and Content Areas. The Reading Teacher, 59(3): 206- 221. doi:1598/RT.59.3.1
63. Rapp et al. (2007). Higher-Order Comprehension Processes in Struggling Readers: A
64. Perspective for Research and Intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4): 289- 3
65. Rennie, J. & Ortlieb, E. (2013). Diverse Literacy Learners: Deficit Versus Productive
66. Pedagogies. In E. Ortlieb & E. H. Cheek, Jr. (Eds.), Literacy Research, Practice, and Evaluation: Vol. 3. School-Based Interventions for Struggling Readers, K-8 (pp. 203- 218). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Rosenshine, B. (1983). Teaching Functions in Instructional Programs. Elementary School Journal, 83(4): 335-351.
67. Schank, R. (1991). The Connoisseur's Guide to the Mind: How We Think, How We
68. Learn, and What It Means to be Intelligent. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Summit Books. Scharlach, T. (2008). START Comprehending: Students and Teachers Actively
69. Reading Text. The Reading Teacher, 62(1): 20-31. Shaw, M. (2013). Reaching and Teaching Thoughtful Literacy to Readers Who
70. Struggle: Increasing Motivation, Engagement, and Comprehension. In E. Ortlieb & E.H. Cheek, Jr. (Eds.), School-Based Interventions for Struggling Readers, K 8 (pp. 121-142). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Shea, M. & Murray, R. (2013). Closing the Gap: Reaching Urban Middle School
71. Students. In E. Ortlieb & E. H. Cheek, Jr. (Eds.), School-Based Interventions for Struggling Readers, K-8 (pp. 241-266). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Sena et al. (2007). Significant Predictors of Test Anxiety among Students with and without Learning Disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40(4): 360-376.
72. Silliman et al. (2000). Clinical Forum. Scaffolds for Learning to Read in an Inclusion
73. Classroom. Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools, 31(3): 265-279. Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. Retrieved from http://www1.appstate.edu/~kms/classes/psy5150/Documents/Skinner195_Operrant.pdf
74. Snow, C. (2002). Reading for Understanding: Towards an R&D Program in Reading
75. Comprehension. California: RAND. Torgesen, J. K. (2001). Intensive Remedial Instruction for Children with Severe
76. Reading Disabilities: Immediate and Long-Term Outcomes from Two Instructional Approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(1): 33-58. Unsworth, L. (2002). Changing Dimensions of School Literacies. Australian Journal of
77. Language and Literacy, 25(1): 62-77. Unsworth, L. (2006). Towards a Metalanguage for Multiliteracies Education:
78. Describing the Meaning-Making Resources of Language-Image Interaction. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 5(1): 55-76. Verlaan, et al. (in press). Developing argument through evidence-based responses to student-generated questions. Voices from the Middle. Wood et al. (1976). The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving. Journal of Child
79. Psychology and Psychiatry, 17: 89-100. Wood et al. (2008). Guiding Readers through Text: Strategy Guides for New Times, 2nd ed. Delaware: International Reading Association.
80. Wood, K. D. & Mateja, J. A. (1983). Adapting Secondary Level Strategies for Use in
81. Elementary Classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 36: 492-496.