Approaches to developing reading skills of learners’ of English

1.1. An approach to develop reading skills
Reading skills are the cognitive processes that a reader uses in making sense of a text. For fluent readers, most of the reading skills are employed unconsciously and automatically. When confronted with a challenging text, fluent readers apply these skills consciously and strategically in order to comprehend. Every language requires a different repertoire of reading skills, based on the structure of the language and the literacy habits of the native speakers of that language. ESL and EFL teachers, therefore, should train students in the skills that will give them the power to comprehend in English. As Brown and others pointed out, learning a new thinking process is best accomplished when the learner is consciously aware of the process, and an approach to teaching reading skills should take that into account. In fact, the more students talk about their thinking processes, the more they learn. Many teachers believe that they can teach reading skills by instructing students to read a text and then showing them how to apply a variety of skills to the text for better comprehension. It is more effective for students, however, to focus on one reading skill at a time and talk about their application of that skill in a number of text samples. Eventually, students will be able to apply the skill unconsciously so that they can call it up to consciousness and apply it strategically whenever they face a challenging text. Literacy is a set of attitudes and beliefs about the ways of using spoken and written language that are acquired in the course of a person’s socialization into a specific cultural context. Language and culture cannot be separated. Language knowledge and thinking patterns are socially constructed within a cultural setting, and each language/culture fosters its own way of understanding the world. In other words, each culture fosters the development of different schemata of the world. That is why readers from two different cultural backgrounds can read the same text and construct very different models of what the text means. They have different schemata (different background knowledge), different expectations about how a text should present information, and different ways of creating meaning. Consequently, teachers cannot assume that students who are good readers in their native language can simply apply successfully the same skills to reading in English. Reading in English requires a set of thinking skills and attitudes that grow out of the spoken and written use of the English language. Teaching reading in standard English to second-language learners and other limited English proficient students means helping them acquire the literate behaviors, the ways of thinking about text, that are practiced by native speakers of English. In fact, learning to read and comprehend a second language requires learning a secondary literacy: alternative cultural interpretations, cultural beliefs about language and discourse, and culture specific formal and content schemata. It is important to realize that learning to read effectively in a second language literally alters the learner’s cognitive structures and values orientations. Therefore, that second-language students need to learn to “think in English” in order to read effectively in English. Reading instruction needs to be based on training ESL and EFL students in new ways of talking and thinking about texts. In teaching reading, instructors need to take into account the following conclusions and recommendations of educational researchers. Early in the twenty-first century, reading comprehension research was summarized by two “blue ribbon” groups: the National Reading Panel and the
Reading Study Group . The National Reading Panel described reading comprehension thus: Comprehension is a complex process often viewed as ‘the essence of reading.’ Reading comprehension is intentional thinking during which meaning is constructed through interactions between text and reader. . . . The content of meaning is influenced by the text and by the reader’s prior knowledge and experience that are brought to bear on it. Similarly, the Reading Study Group noted that reading comprehension involves four components: the reader, the text, the activity, and the situational context. The first three essential components—the reader, the text, and the task—occur within the fourth component of reading comprehension the situational context. The reader is the one doing the comprehending, and the text is the reading material (e.g., stories, nonfiction selections, etc.). The activity refers to what kind of comprehension task, skill, strategy, or concept the reader is attempting to perform (e.g., discovering the author’s main idea, understanding a sequence of events, thinking about a character’s intent in a story, etc). The situational context of reading comprehension can be thought of in at least two ways. First, the actual setting where reading occurs—at home, in a school classroom, the library, under a blanket at bedtime, and so on—affects how well one comprehends while reading. There is little doubt that children’s reading comprehension
is influenced by the setting in which they read. (Aren’t you more focused and
relaxed when reading alone at home than if called on to read during a college class?) Second, there is a social context associated with reading comprehension. In some cases, reading comprehension occurs individually, alone—a very limited social setting. In other cases, however, reading comprehension can be part of a vibrant social activity in which people—teachers, parents, and children read a text together and jointly construct meaning through discussion. Lively interaction about a text in the company of others seems to be the optimal situational context to enhance students’ reading comprehension found that commercial reading programs used by most school districts are not very effective in teaching reading comprehension. Such core reading programs must be used selectively and supplemented by a knowledgeable teacher if children are to reach their potential. For example, the National Reading Panel recommends that teachers primarily focus on seven specific comprehension strategies supported by rigorous research whereas other researchers feel five is the magic number of strategies for intensive focus. But the curricula found in leading core reading programs today cover skills and strategies varying from 18 to 29 per program per year! Not only is this unnecessary and ineffective, but the large numbers of skills and strategies taught in core reading programs means all get superficial treatment, often at a rate of one skill a week . As Dewitz and colleagues state:
Our analysis of comprehension instruction in core reading programs demonstrates several shortcomings that may undermine their effi cacy. First, the comprehension skills and strategies curricula are wide but not terribly deep. The structure of the curricula is often incoherent so that students and teachers do not know how skills and strategies relate to one another or how acquiring these sets of skills leads to becoming a better reader. The review ways you can take control and supplement your core reading program to produce effective comprehension instruction for your students.
Research over the past 30 years has contributed greatly to our understanding of the thinking processes involved in reading comprehension. Surprisingly, however, little research has focused on the development of young children’s comprehension. Pressley describes the development of reading comprehension as a two stage process, beginning with “lower processes” focused at the word level such as word recognition (phonics, sight words), fluency (rate, accuracy, and expression), and vocabulary (word meanings). The second stage of reading comprehension development focuses on higher-order thinking relating prior knowledge to text content and consciously learning, selecting, and controlling the use of several cognitive strategies for remembering and learning from text. Reading comprehension research over the years has been profoundly influenced by schema theory, a hypothesis that explains how information we have stored in our minds helps us gain new knowledge. The term schema (the plural
is schemata or schemas) can be defined as a kind of storage cabinet in our brains with file folders containing different information about concepts (chairs, birds, ships), events (weddings, birthdays, school experiences), emotions (anger, frustration, joy, pleasure), and roles (parent, judge, teacher) drawn from our life experiences. Researchers often think of our schemas as neural networks (i.e., “brain networks”) of connected meanings
(Collins & Quillian, 1969; Lindsay & Norman, 1977). Each schema is connected to other related schemas, forming a vast, interconnected network of knowledge and experiences. The size and content of an individual’s schemas are infl uenced by personal
experiences, both direct and vicarious. Therefore, younger children typically possess fewer, less well-developed schemas about a great many things than do mature adults. For example, Figure 7.1 represents a schema for birds that an elementary student might produce, showing it as a network of associated meanings. In 1978, Dolores Durkin reported fi ndings from her studies of reading comprehension instruction as taught by teachers using commercial reading programs (i.e., basal or core reading programs). After observing in both reading and social studies classrooms, Durkin concluded that the teachers spent very little time actually teaching children how to understand what they read. In fact, less than one percent of total reading or social studies instructional time was devoted to the teaching of reading comprehension. Unfortunately, researchers have concluded that the situation in today’s schools has not improved appreciably over the past 30 years . Research has shown that reading comprehension improves most when teachers provide explicit comprehension instruction to children (e.g., Dymock & Nicholson, 2010; Manyak & Bauer, 2008; McKeown et al., 2009; National Reading Panel, 2000). We support the following fi ve research-supported strategies as the most critical keys for focused instruction:
1. Activating prior knowledge
2. Questioning
3. Analyzing text structure
4. Creating mental or visual images
5. Summarizing
The National Reading Panel, and other studies since, have also found that comprehension instruction is most effective when there is a great deal of text-focused dialogue among students (Kelley & Clausen-Grace, 2007, in press; Mills, 2009; Pressley, 2006). Research also indicates that teaching children how to use combinations of comprehension strategies as they read, or multiple comprehension strategies (McKeown et al., 2009), yields particularly strong results for improving children’s reading achievement. Other research evidence points clearly to the need for teachers. Chapter 7 Teaching Reading Comprehension to help students apply comprehension strategies in a variety of text types (narrative and expository) and genres (fairy tales, realistic fi ction, almanacs, encyclopedias, etc.) (Dymock & Nicholson, 2010). Thus, the key to successful instruction is delivering carefully structured learning activities that support children while they are developing the ability to use multiple comprehension strategies to understand what they read (McKeown et al., 2009; Pressley, 2006; Reutzel et al., 2005). It is important that teachers know and understand the minimum expected outcomes, or end-of-year benchmark standards, for comprehension development at each grade level, especially in the early years. This information becomes an essential road map for teachers to use in assessing each student’s level of comprehension development. With this knowledge, you can plan instruction that best fits the needs of every child
and that lays the groundwork for appropriate “next steps” in comprehension development. Of course, in the classroom you will discover students are at different places in their comprehension development, and you will need to plan small-group sessions each day for students having common needs. In this way, you can help all students continue learning in a systematic fashion. Figure 7.3 offers research based end of year “benchmark” standards. Later in this chapter we provide specific assessment and teaching strategies related to these standards. Good readers are often selective, focusing their attention on the parts of the text that are most appropriate to their goals. Effective readers go beyond the literal meaning of text, interpreting what they read by filtering ideas in the text through their prior knowledge. Such interpretations often include an evaluation of the quality of the ideas in the text. Often, such associations are carried out intentionally by thinking about how the ideas in the text seem vaguely familiar and then recalling where similar ideas were presented or encountered. Readers also make predictions and form hypotheses about what will happen next, or what ideas the text will advance. In addition, readers continuously evaluate these predictions and hypotheses and revise them as the reading warrants. As they read, good readers vary their reading speed, sometimes skimming and sometimes rereading a section of text that is especially relevant to the reading goals. As they encounter new ideas during reading, they update their prior knowledge. Good readers make conscious inferences, such as determining the author’s intentions for writing the text, clarifying the meaning of unknown words, and filling in information if they perceive gaps in an argument. They create mental images. If, for example, they are reading fiction, they create mental pictures of settings and characters. Good readers are strategic! Good readers are often selective, focusing their attention on the parts of the text that are most appropriate to their goals. Effective readers go beyond the literal meaning of text, interpreting what they read by filtering ideas in the text through their prior knowledge. Such interpretations often include an evaluation of the quality of the ideas in the text. Often, such associations are carried out intentionally by thinking about how the ideas in the text seem vaguely familiar and then recalling where similar ideas were presented or encountered. Readers also make predictions and form hypotheses about what will happen next, or what ideas the text will advance. In addition, readers continuously evaluate these predictions and hypotheses and revise them as the reading warrants. As they read, good readers vary their reading speed, sometimes skimming and sometimes rereading a section of text that is especially relevant to the reading goals. As they encounter new ideas during reading, they update their prior knowledge. Good readers make conscious inferences, such as determining the author’s intentions for writing the text, clarifying the meaning of unknown words, and filling in information if they perceive gaps in an argument. They create mental images. If, for example, they are reading fiction, they create mental pictures of settings and characters. Good readers are strategic! What are Strategies? Comprehension strategies are conscious or intentional plans that people use in order to achieve a goal (Roit, 2005) and are used deliberately to make sense of text (Afflerbach et al. 2008). Readers use strategies consciously to make sense of the text, remember critical ideas and integrate new learning into existing schema or prior knowledge. Students need to learn how to use strategies independently, to recognize and solve problems, and to delve deeper into text to make connections and inferences. Reading strategies are not the same as instructional strategies. The goal of instructional strategies is to teach students how to make sense of text. Instructional strategies are the plans used by the teacher to teach comprehension. They include but are not limited to explicit explanation, modeling, pre-teaching, organizing learning and scaffolding. Strategies laid out in this chapter emphasize teaching and student engagement. Obviously, there is an interaction between both reading and instructional strategies. Often the terms comprehension strategies, skills, and activities are used interchangeably. Comprehension strategies are used consciously by the reader to monitor and check understanding, to clarify confusion, and to process text. Strategies are situational and are used intentionally by readers. (McEwan, 2004). In contrast, once skills are learned, they are used unconsciously, i.e. decoding words or breaking words into syllables. Skills are also the tools readers use to organize the structure of text, e.g., main idea and supporting details, compare and contrast, sequencing, etc. Activities such as charts like KWL or terms such as “click and clunk” and “get the gist” are not comprehension strategies themselves but instructional devices to encourage students to use comprehension strategies as they read. Props such as strategy character puppets may catch children’s interest but they may also take students’ attention away from the strategies themselves. In contrast, skills are applied automatically rather than deliberately and yield a high level of performance with minimal effort (Afflerbach et. al, 2008; Dewitz et al. 2009). Learning skills requires practice in order to become automatic. Decoding is a skill that when it becomes automatic results in fluent reading. Readers read most words without ever thinking about the sounds and spellings. Similarly, fluency is a skill that develops over time, allowing readers to access text with automatically so they can focus their mental efforts on making sense of what is being read. The Interplay of Strategies and Skills Simply put, comprehension strategies are the cognitive processes and procedures that readers bring to the content of reading; comprehension skills are the procedures they use to grasp the organizational structure of the text. Readers employ various comprehension strategies before, during, and after an initial reading of a text. Comprehension skills, however, are best employed as readers reread a text and do close reading. Why is it important to provide students with instruction in comprehension skills? The most persuasive answer is given by Pearson and Camperell : When we identify a variable, including a text structure variable, that looks like it might make a difference in comprehension, we ought to adopt a frontal assault strategy when considering its instructional power—teach about it systematically and make Effective Teaching Strategies for Reading Comprehension 3certain students have a chance to practice it. Research states that the ability to identify and use text structure can make a difference in students’ text comprehension. Therefore, teaching students the skills necessary to use text structure is another way to improve their reading comprehension. A very practical way to understand both the distinction between strategies and skills and their interaction is to think about the sport of basketball. Players practice different types of shots - three-point plays, hook shots and dunks; they work on different types of dribbling from pull back to crossover to behind the back. All of these skills become automatic with practice, just as reading skills become automatic. . But skills are not sufficient to win the game. Players also learn to play strategically by looking at where players are positioned, where a shot can be made, and which shot makes the most sense. Reading the court and players is key to knowing which play to make. The same is true with reading. The foundational skills of reading are necessary but not sufficient. Skills must work in partnership with strategies. Skills are used automatically; strategies are used thoughtfully and intentionally. Like basketball shots, main idea, sequencing, compare and contrast, and other reading skills need to be learned and practiced. They are foundational skills that enable the reader to use comprehension strategies effectively. For example, understanding the concept of main idea underlies summarizing. Effective readers are constantly monitoring their understanding, assessing their understanding, and identifying when comprehension breaks down. They are meta cognitively aware or in control of their own thinking throughout their reading. Luke compares this meta cognitive or self-regulatory behavior to a foreman who oversees monitors all the parts of a project. When the project is moving along smoothly, there is no need for intervention. Depending upon the problem, the foreman may need to stop the project to take some action. And this is exactly what proficient readers do. When reading comprehension is moving along smoothly, skilled readers do not need to stop. However, when reading challenging or complex text, these same readers recognize when comprehension is interrupted, identify the cause or problem like unfamiliar words or confusing referents or inconsistent ideas, and use strategies to clarify and resolve the problems. They also use strategies such as predicting and making connections to increase engagement and promote deeper meaning. Novice and struggling readers seem to lack awareness of thinking about what is and is not making sense as they read. They are often are unaware of when they do not understand what they are reading. This is painfully evident when a struggling reader turns two pages instead of one and continues on the wrong page even though it does not make sense. They often are focused so much on reading the words that they cannot think about how the words connect to create meaning. Good readers, on the other hand, are aware of when their comprehension breaks down or if they are confused by the text and have “fix up” strategies to resolve their problems. They also know that it is OK to ask for help from others. Activating Prior Knowledge Background or prior knowledge comes from life experiences, either real or vicarious (Knuth and James, 1991). Often people presume that background knowledge comes just from actual experiences, but it is often acquired through reading, movies, discussion, or any number of other indirect means, all of which can increase background knowledge. In fact, reading is one of the most important ways that people build prior knowledge. Prior knowledge is the sum of all the knowledge that readers have acquired, experienced, and stored in memory or schema. Schema theory proposes that knowledge is organized in a network of structures called schemata. Readers not only have schemata for ideas and experiences but for text structures such as fiction and nonfiction. When readers activate their schema they link to this network of information. As readers interact with a text, they continually relate what they are reading to their prior life and reading experiences. Readers’ interest in what they are reading influences the links they continue to build in their schema which is one reason why motivation increases comprehension. The relationship between prior knowledge and reading is obviously reciprocal. Prior knowledge enhances comprehension by enabling readers to comprehend text better, to make connections, to predict, and to develop inferences as they are reading. As readers learn more from reading, they are also expanding their knowledge, which is then stored in memory and connected to schemata, which are activated at a later time as background or prior knowledge. Activating background for proficient readers happens quite naturally as they preview a text before reading, browsing through the text, reflecting on the author, and noting information in the book jacket or other visuals. Making conscious what is already known helps the reader link new information with what is already known make connections, increase the ability to make inferences, improve recall of content, view and reconcile conflicting information, interpret text and absorb new information (Kujawa and Huske, 1995; Pressley, 2000). For students with limited background knowledge, it may be necessary to help them build background prior to reading (Stevens, 1982; Hayes and Tierney, 1982). When reading fiction, readers may activate prior knowledge by browsing the text to use one or more of the following browsing activities to activate background knowledge.